9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (4) TMI 1542X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rted within the validity period of the e-way bill. The transporter may extend the validity period after updating the details in Part B of FORM GST EWB-01 - third proviso states that the validity of e-way bill may be extended within 8 hours from the time of its expiry. Thus, the rules give certain latitude and therefore, the conduct of the transporter is required to be examined bearing in mind that the rule itself provides for extension of the validity period of the e-way bill and the transporter has been given a latitude of 8 hours to seek for such extension. If that benefit is granted to the appellant, then the delay would be about 1 hour and 35 minutes. Further, consignee Larsen Toubro Construction had sent an e-mail on 15th May, 202 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... her side, the writ petition is taken up along with this appeal. The short issue involved in the case is whether 200% penalty could have been imposed in terms of section 129 of the WBGST Act, 2017. 3. The appellant was carrying goods, which were consigned to Larsen Toubro Limited in West Bengal. The e-way bill generated on 7th May, 2022 at 3:46 PM was valid upto 8th May, 2022 11:59 P.M. The goods were shipped to the following address : Kankora, Near Shantiniketan Road, Trilokchandrapur, Bud Trilok Chandrapur, Panagarh, Durgapur, Barddhaman, West Bengal-713148. 4. It is not in dispute that the vehicle along with the goods entered the Durgapur industrial belt within the validity of the e-way bill. The vehicle was intercepted on 9th May ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he goods were intercepted, it was delayed by about 01 hour and 35 minutes. The particular details given in the e-way bill will show that the area Durgapur has also been mentioned. It is not disputed that the vehicle was within the Durgapur industrial belt though not at Panagarh. Thus, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and in the absence of any material produced by the revenue to doubt the bona fides of the appellant, we are of the view that penalty should not have been imposed in this case. 6. The learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents/State had referred to the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in Chairman, SEBI v. Shriram Mutual Fund Anr. reported at (2006) 5 SCC 361 for the proposition t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in Part B of FORM GST EWB-01. 9. The third proviso states that the validity of e-way bill may be extended within 8 hours from the time of its expiry. Thus, the rules give certain latitude and therefore, the conduct of the transporter is required to be examined bearing in mind that the rule itself provides for extension of the validity period of the e-way bill and the transporter has been given a latitude of 8 hours to seek for such extension. 10. If that benefit is granted to the appellant, then the delay would be about 1 hour and 35 minutes. Further, consignee Larsen Toubro Construction had sent an e-mail on 15th May, 2022 stating that initially the goods were consigned to Kankora, Near Shantiniketan Road, Trilokchandrapur, Bud Bu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
