2023 (11) TMI 715 - HC - GST

Levy of penalty - goods being transported without e-way bill under U.P. G.S.T. Act, 2017 read with Rules framed thereunder - HELD THAT - The infraction occurred during the period 01.02.2018 to 31.03.2018 - Learned Division Bench of this Court in M/S VARUN BEVERAGES LIMITED VERSUS STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS 2021 (10) TMI 429 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT held so far as the matter is squarely covered by a decision of Division Bench of this Court in M/S GODREJ AND BOYCE MANUFACTURING CO. LTD., L.G. ELECTRONICS INDIA PVT. LTD., BHARTI AIRTEL LIMITED, M/S GUALA CLOSURES (INDIA) PVT. LTD., M/S. RAS POLYTEX PVT. LIMITED, RIMJHIM ISPAT LIMITED, RIMJHIM ISPAT LIMITED, M/S. GAURANG PRODUCTS PVT. LTD., M/S. ADITYA BIRLA FASHION AND RETAIL LTD., M/S. NAVYUG AIRCONDITIONING AND M/S. PROACTIVE PLAST PVT. LTD. VERSUS STATE OF U.P. AND 02 OTHERS AND STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS 2018 (9) TMI 1261 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT , with which we are in agreement, the present writ petition is allowed. The petitioner is entitled to the benefit of the judgment rendered in M/s Varun Beverages - the impugned order dated 25.04.2019 is quashed - petition allowed.

Summary

Issues involved:
The judgment deals with the imposition of penalty for transporting goods without an e-way bill under the U.P. G.S.T. Act, 2017 during a specific period. The primary issue is whether the requirement of an e-way bill was enforceable during the period in question.

Imposition of Penalty:
The impugned order dated 25.04.2019 imposed a penalty for transporting goods without an e-way bill under the U.P. G.S.T. Act, 2017. The Division Bench referred to previous judgments to determine the enforceability of the e-way bill requirement during the relevant period. It was held that during the period from 01.02.2018 to 31.03.2018, the requirement of an e-way bill under U.P. GST Act was unenforceable. Therefore, the seizure of goods and the penalty imposed were deemed unjustified and unsustainable based on the legal interpretation provided by the Division Bench.

Benefit of Previous Judgments:
The petitioner in this case was entitled to the benefit of a previous judgment in M/s Varun Beverages Limited vs. State of U.P. and Others. The Court found that the present matter was squarely covered by the decision of the Division Bench in M/s Godrej and Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd, which had established the unenforceability of the e-way bill requirement during the specified period. Consequently, the writ petition was allowed, and the impugned orders were quashed in favor of the petitioner.

Decision and Relief:
As a result of the Court's analysis and application of previous judgments, the impugned order dated 25.04.2019 was quashed. The Court directed that any amount deposited by the petitioner should be refunded in accordance with the law within one month. Ultimately, the writ petition was allowed in light of the legal principles established in the previous judgments, providing relief to the petitioner.