9911796707
TMI BlogInterpreting E-Way Bill Regulations: High Court's Guidance on Proportionality and Taxpayer IntentX X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re and supply of industrial products, received an order from a consignee in Rajkot, Gujarat. The goods were booked through a transport service, and an e-way bill was generated with all the required details, except for Part-B, which did not mention the vehicle number. During transportation, the vehicle was intercepted by the Assistant Commissioner (in-charge), Commercial Tax, Mobile Squad, who issued an interception memo u/s 129(1) of the UPGST Act, 2017 . The respondent detained the vehicle and goods, alleging that Part-B of the e-way bill was incomplete and no vehicle number was mentioned. The petitioner contended that there was no intention to evade tax payment, as IGST at 18% was charged, and both the consignor and consignee were registe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ential show cause notice u/s 129(3) of the Act underscores the principle of proportionality and reasonableness in enforcing tax laws. The court emphasized that mere non-mention of the vehicle number in Part-B, especially in cases where the goods were being transported within a short distance for further transportation, should not automatically lead to harsh penalties or seizures. The judgment also highlights the need for tax authorities to consider relevant notifications and provisions before taking coercive actions. The HC's reference to the notification dated 07.03.2018, which provided an exemption for furnishing conveyance details in Part-B for short-distance transportation, reinforces the importance of interpreting and applying tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... after considering the arguments and relevant documents, ruled in favor of the petitioner. The court found no ill intention on the part of the petitioner in not filling up Part-B, as they were not required to provide the vehicle number before the goods were loaded for transportation to the final destination. The HC observed that the non-mention of the vehicle number in Part-B could not be a ground for seizure, and the respondent failed to consider the relevant notification that provided an exemption for furnishing conveyance details in Part-B for short-distance transportation. Consequently, the HC quashed the seizure order and the consequential show cause notice, emphasizing the principles of reasonableness and proportionality in enforcing t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
