Case Title | M/S H.B.L.Power Systems Ltd vs State Of U.P.Thru Prin.Secy.Dept Of Tax And Registration And Ors. |
Court | Allahabad High Court |
Honorable Judges | Justice Pankaj Bhatia |
Citation | 2022 (7) GSTPanacea 121 HC Allahabad |
Judgement Date | 27-July-2022 |
Council for Petitioner | Mudit Agarwal |
Council for Respondent | C.S.C. |
The Allahabad High Court bench of Justice Pankaj Bhatia has held that Petitioner not carrying E-way bill as are required under the U.P. G.S.T. Rules, looses significance as the petitioner were not liable to be taxed under the U.P. G.S.T. Act being an inter-state supply and further the requirement of E-way bill was recommended to be not enforced till 31st March, 2018, in view of the recommendation of the G.S.T. Council
FACTS OF THE CASE
Petitioner goods were seized when reached at Lucknow under U.P.GST Act whereby the goods have released in favour of the petitioner subject to deposit of Rs. 10,46,780/- as tax and a further penalty of Rs. 10,46,780/- as well as the Appellate Order dated 06.11.2018, whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner was dismissed
Petition has been filed challenging the judgment and order dated 19.03.2018 as well as the Appellate Order dated 06.11.2018.
Petitioner has raised tax invoice date 26.02.2018 for dispatched of battery sets to Modern Coach Factory, Raebareli from Telangana .Raising an Invoice, the petitioner had levied and deposited I.G.S.T at the rate of 28%. Also obtain E-way bill, uploaded prescribed details on the portal of the G.S.T. and generated the E-way bill for the goods in question. Details of dispatched goods were also entered on the portal and the same was also printed on the E-way bill.
The reason for passing the seizure order was that the E-way bill system, as introduced by the Central Government under the C.G.S.T., was replaced by the State E-way bills, which had been suspended by the Central Government w.e.f. 02.02.2018. Thus, the State was of the view that once the Central Government had suspended its E-way bill, the requirement of the State E-way bill stood revived automatically and as the petitioner was not carrying the State E-way bill.
Petitioner argues that in any case admittedly the goods were being transported from Telangana to Uttar Pradesh and thus there was no liability upon the petitioner to pay the tax under the U.P. G.S.T. Act, as it was a case of inter-state transfer of goods. He further argues that in any event, the fact remains that the petitioner had deposited the tax and had taken an E-way bill also, thus, the levy of penalty was not at all justified.
Also Government keeping in view the hardship faced by the dealers across India. The G.S.T. Council noticing the said hardship faced by the assesses had postponed the enforcement of the requirement of E-way bill till 31st March, 2018 in pursuance to the recommendation of the G.S.T. Council.
COURT HELD
Considering the facts as recorded, held that the whole basis based upon which the order has been passed that the petitioner was not carrying the E-way bill as are required under the U.P. G.S.T. Rules, looses significance as the petitioner were not liable to be taxed under the U.P. G.S.T. Act being an inter-state supply and further the requirement of E-way bill was recommended to be not enforced till 31st March, 2018, in view of the recommendation of the G.S.T. Council
Thus, on both the reasonings, as recorded above, the demand as raised in the order dated 19.03.2018 and as affirmed vide order dated 06.11.2018 are clearly not sustainable and are hereby set aside. Thus the writ petition is allowed with directions to refund the 10% amount deposited by the petitioner while preferring the appeal, in accordance with law, within a period of two months from today. The bank guarantee given by the petitioner shall also be released to him.
ANALYSIS OF THE JUDGEMENT
As reason for seizer of goods was not carrying E Way bill as are required under the U.P. G.S.T. Rule as the petitioner were not liable to be taxed under the U.P. G.S.T. Act being an inter-state supply was not acceptable. further the requirement of E-way bill was recommended to be not enforced till 31st March, 2018, in view of the recommendation of the G.S.T. Council.
Download PDF:
H.B.L. Power Systems Ltd
For Reference Visit:
Allahabad High Court