|
Case Title |
M/s Create Consults, Mumbai Vs Jt. Commissioner of SGST, Bhopal , Madhya Pradesh |
|
Court |
Madhya Pradesh High Court |
|
Honorable Judges |
Justice Sheel Nagu & Justice Maninder S. Bhatti |
|
Citation |
2022 (3) GSTPanacea 105 HC Madhya Pradesh |
|
Judgement Date |
16–March-2022 |
|
Counsel for Petitioner |
Siddharth Shrivastava |
|
Counsel for Respondents |
Piyush D Dharmadhikari |
The Jabalpur High Court bench of Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Maninder S. Bhatti has held that bonafied mistake in generating E-way Bill will not attract penalty u/s 129 but as per circular no CBEC/20/16/03/2017 – GST dated 14.09.2018.
FACTS OF THE CASE
The Petitioner firm is engaged in the business of selling P & G recycled bags. In the present case petitioner purchased bags from AVGOL India Pvt Ltd and sold to SIDWIN Fabric Pvt. Ltd. Goods moved from the factory of AVGOL India Pvt Ltd in Bhopal to SIDWIN Fabric Pvt. Ltd at Gambhoiharsol , Tehsil- Himmatnagar,Gujrat, petitioner acted as a selling agent. Petitioner while generating the E-way Bill for dispatch of goods from AVGOL India Pvt Ltd to SIDWIN Fabric Pvt. Ltd made a bonafied and inadvertent mistake of that, instead of mentioning name of AVGOL India Pvt. Ltd. as dispatcher, erroneously mentioned name of Petitioner. The invoice accompanying the transport rightfully contained the names of AVGOL India Pvt Ltd as dispatcher and SIDWIN Fabric Pvt. Ltd as recipient. The invoice as well as E-way Bill contained the same registration number of carrier truck and date of generation was also same.
Assistant Commissioner, State Tax initiated proceedings u/s 129 of CGST Act 2017 and imposed heavy penalty vide order dated 26.04.2019 on Petitioner. Out of compulsion petitioner paid the penalty with tax thereon.
The Petitioner filed an appeal u/s 107 before Joint Commissioner, State Tax an Appellate Authority challenging the order of penalty dated 26.04.2019, which Appellate Authority dismissed vide order dated 31.10.2019. Petitioner was not informed of order of Appellate Authority dated 31.10.2019 by his counsel and later due to outbreak of Covid-19 Pandemic could not challenge it, and requested for condonation of delay for bonafied reason, which was allowed by the Hon. court. The Petitioner made a reference to an order passed by a Co-ordinate bench of Jabalpur High court dated 04.02.2021 in W.P.no 12913/2020 in an identical case of bonafied mistake in E-way Bill. In the said order reference to circular no CBEC/20/16/03/2017 – GST dated 14.09.2018 issued by Ministry of Finance was made which held that in case of minor discrepancies in details mentioned in E-way Bill, where alongwith E-way bill transport carrying consignment of goods is accompanied by invoice or any other specified document, imposition of penalty u/s 129 cannot be levied. Instead minor penalty can be imposed.
COURT HELD
Considering the facts as recorded, Hon. court considering the earlier order passed by Co-ordinate Bench in an identical case, quashed aside the order dated 24.06.2019 and 31.10.2019 of respondents considering the error made by petitioner as bonafied on account of some clerical or typographical error.
Respondents were allowed at liberty to consider the case of petitioner for imposition of minor penalty in accordance with circular no CBEC/20/16/03/2017 – GST dated 14.09.2018.
ANALYSIS OF THE JUDGEMENT
Penalty applicable in the case of proceeding u/s 129 can not be levied on bonafied/clerical/typographical error in E-way bill, where the transport carrier of goods is also accompanied by proper invoice or any other specified document.
Download PDF:
For Reference Visit:
Madhya Pradesh High Court