9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (1) TMI 1311X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... imposed under clause (a) of Section 129(1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 by the adjudicating authority and calculating 200% of tax amount. The transaction in question is not attracting any tax liability as the same is stock transfer and goods removed under Delivery Challans. This action of the appellant is not attracting any tax liability under GST Law only procedures are prescribed for such transactions such as the issuance of a Delivery Challan for the movement of such goods and the issue of an e-way bill. As per the definition provided under section 2(47) of the said act prescribed such type of non-taxable supply also considered as exempt supply . Therefore, the stock transfer of goods by the appellant is considered as exempted goods. Any contravention of provisions made under the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, and rules made thereunder during the transit of goods, the same should be penalized under section 129 ibid. In present case it is undisputed facts that the E-way is not tendered by the transporter. The contention of the appellant in this regard is that there was glitch in GST E-way Portal hence E-way was not generated - the goods in question i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e as follows by the adjudicating authority : 1. Two delivery challans were tendered for the same consignment loaded in the above conveyance viz. Delivery challans no. IWLGJ2122WTG243 (valued at Rs. 49,500/-) and IWLGJ2122WTG244 (valued at Rs. 49,500/-) both dated 28-3-2022 and another two Delivery challans bearing the same nos. IWLGJ2122WTG243 dated 28-3-2022 valued at Rs. 1,75,94,186/-and IWLGJ2122WTG244 dated 28-3-2022 valued at Rs. 1,75,94,186/-. It is observed that there is a mismatch/huge difference in the value of the said consignment. 2. E-way Bills bearing Nos. 641401700414 and 641401699649 both dated 28-3-2022 were generated after the interception of the above vehicle by the E-way bill squad mentioning the value of the consignment very high was as compared to the value shown in the Delivery Challans tendered at the time of interception of vehicle. The said notice culminated in the imposition of penalties for Rs. 42,22,604/- each under CGST and SGST Acts, under clauses (a) of Section 129(1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 vide Order No. . 01/2022-23 dated 6-4-2022 in form of MOV-09 by the Deputy Commissioner (AE) of CGST, Gandhidham, Commissionerate Kut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to meet, the ends of natural justice. Therefore, an Order issued without providing an opportunity of being heard, is without the authority of law, illegal, and liable to be quashed. (8) They requested to set aside the penalty order and allowed the appeal. 4. Personal hearing in the matter was held on 29-11-2022. Shri Vikas Agarwal, Chartered Accountant of the appellant attended the personal hearing wherein he reiterated the contents of the written submission and requested to restore the registration. In the written submission the appellant made all the pleas which were already made in Appeal Memo. The appellant also relied upon the various decisions of appellate forums which are as under : * ABCO Trades (P.) Ltd. v. Asstt. State Tax Officer, SGST Deptt., Karunagapally Reposted In 2020 (42) G.S.T.L. 63 (Ker). * Mohammad Shereef v. State of Kerala [Reported In 2020 (43) G.S.T.L. 511 (Ker.)], Affirmed In State Of Kerala v. Mohammad Shereef [Reported In 2021 (52) G.S.T.L. 270 (Ker)] * Gobind Tobacco Manufacturing Co. v. State of U.P. Reported In 2022 (61) G.S.T.L. 385 (All) * Sanchar Telesystems Ltd. v. Commissioner Tax Officer, Vigilance-4, Bengaluru Reported In 2021 (44) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he in charge of the vehicle in which goods had been transported. They also definite that the e-way bill for the said goods could not be generated on account of some technical glitches occurred on the portal of E-way bill hence considering the urgency of delivery of goods, they removed the same without the E-way bill and later on the same was generated. They also contended that the adjudicating authority has imposed harsh penalties on the minor mistakes made by them. They also stated that the penalties paid by them under DRC-03 is under protest as action of the department is very harsh and they required goods urgently their installation site. They also contended that there was no intention to evade the tax in the present case as the goods is already tax paid. They relied upon various decisions of the appellate forum. 8. I find that the penalty imposed under clause (a) of Section 129(1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 for violation of provisions made under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and rules made thereunder. The appellant is a registered company and has a good reputation in the market of windmill. Further, events made for not following the provisi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etention or seizure and after detention or seizure, shall be released, -- [(a) on payment of penalty equal to two hundred per cent of the tax payable on such goods and, in case of exempted goods, on payment of an amount equal to two per cent of the value of goods or twenty-five thousand rupees, whichever is less, where the owner of the goods comes forward for payment of such penalty; (b) on payment of penalty equal to fifty per cent of the value of the goods or two hundred per cent of the tax payable on such goods, whichever is higher, and in case of exempted goods, on payment of an amount equal to five per cent of the value of goods or twenty-five thousand rupees, whichever is less, where the owner of the goods does not come forward for payment of such penalty;] (c) ** ** ** From the above provisions, it is clear that any contravention of provisions made under the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, and rules made thereunder during the transit of goods, the same should be penalized under section 129 ibid. In present case it is undisputed facts that the E-way is not tendered by the transporter. The contention of the appellant in this regard is that there was glitch in G ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
