9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (9) TMI 267 - HC - GSTLevy of tax and penalty - it is alleged that the e-way bill was being reused - HELD THAT - This Court in M/s Anandeshwar Traders Vs. State of U.P. and Others 2021 (1) TMI 1091 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT has categorically held that it is for the seizing authority to establish by evidence that e-way bill was being reused. In the present case, there is no evidence produced by the seizing authority that there is a reuse of the e-way bill by the petitioner - the case of the petitioner squarely covered by the aforesaid judgment. The impugned order dated 31.10.2017 and 23.08.2019 cannot stand and the same are set aside - Petition allowed.
Issues:
Challenge to tax and penalty imposition based on e-way bill reuse. Analysis: The petitioner challenged orders imposing tax and penalty for reusing an e-way bill. The transport vehicle carrying goods was intercepted, and a seizure order was passed on the grounds that the invoice and e-way bill did not relate to the intercepted goods. The petitioner explained that the goods were damaged during transportation, necessitating repackaging before delivery. Tax and penalty were imposed under Section 129(3) of the U.P. Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, which the petitioner paid under protest. The appeal against the penalty was also rejected. The petitioner argued that the taxing authority failed to prove e-way bill reuse, citing the judgment in the case of 'M/s Anandeshwar Traders Vs. State of U.P. and Others.' The judgment emphasized the need for positive evidence to establish e-way bill reuse and shift the onus to the assessing authority to prove transportation of goods. The court found the petitioner's case aligned with the precedent, stating that the seizing authority must provide evidence of e-way bill reuse, which was lacking in this instance. Conclusion: The High Court set aside the orders dated 31.10.2017 and 23.08.2019, ruling in favor of the petitioner based on the lack of evidence supporting e-way bill reuse. The court allowed the writ petition, highlighting the necessity for the seizing authority to establish e-way bill reuse through concrete evidence, as per the legal precedent cited in the case analysis.
|
