Tax Management India.Com

Home Page

Home List
← Previous Next →

2018 (7) TMI 1097

Non-filing of part B of E-way bill - Inter and Intra State Supply of Goods or Services - Rule 138 and Section 68 of Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 and M. P. Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 - case of petitioner is that due to technical error, Part-B of the e-way bill cannot be updated - demand of GST with equal amount of penalty - petitioner placed reliance on the Division Bench decision of Allahabad High Court in the case of VSL Alloys (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of UP & others [2018 (5 .....

X X X X X X X

Full Contents

X X X X X X X

arned Authority rightly imposed the penalty and directed the petitioner to pay the same - demand upheld - petition has no merit and is dismissed. - W.P. No. 12399 of 2018 - Dated:- 5-7-2018 - Shri P.K. Jaiswal & Shri S.K. Awasthi JJ. Shri Vivek Dalal, learned counsel for the petitioner. Ms. Archana Kher, learned Government Advocate for the respondents - State. Per P.K. Jaiswal, J. By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is praying for quashment of .....

X X X X X X X

Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d services such as door to door pick-up and delivery of the shipments etc. 4. On 01.07.2017, M. P. Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 came into force and was published in the M. P. Gazette on the same day to make provisions for levy and collection of tax on Inter and Intra State Supply of Goods or Services or both by the State of M. P. and the matters connected therewith and or incidental thereto. 5. Section 68 of the Act provides for inspection of goods in movement, which reads as under :- 1. The .....

X X X X X X X

Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t of the power conferred under Section 68, the vehicle of the petitioner company was checked on 27.04.2018. On enquiry, the driver (person incharge of a conveyance) of the vehicle bearing registration No.HR-47-C-2647 produced the bill and challan, but eway bill on enquiry, it was found that the petitioner transporter company who was transporting the goods from Pune(Wadki), Maharashtra to Noida via Indore and other different places has not uploaded/updated the part-B of the e-way bill which is a .....

X X X X X X X

Full Contents

X X X X X X X

976.00 2226598. 00 0+0+12+0 Net Taxable Amount : 2226598.00 CGST Amount ₹ 0.00 SGST Amount ₹ 0.00 IGST Amount ₹ 267191.52 Cess Amount ₹ 0.00 4. Transportation Details 36AADCG2096A1ZY & GATI-KINTETSU EXPRESS PRIVATE Transporter ID & Name : LIMITED Transporter Doc. No. & Date : 229076616 & 25/04/2018 5. Vehicle Details Mode Vehicle/Trans Doc No. & Dt. From Entered Date Entered By CEWB No. (if any) Road MH14EM1313 Pune 25/04/2018 07.49 PM 36AADCG2 096A12Y .....

X X X X X X X

Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the common portal in Part-B of Form GST EWB-01. The petitioner violated the provisions of Rule 138 and Section 68 of the Act, therefore, proceeding was initiated under Section 129 of the Act and penalty was imposed under Section 122 of the Act since he was transporting the taxable goods without the cover of documents. 11. The Department, after following due procedure, issued show cause notice and penalty case was registered. The petitioner submitted its reply by stating that due to technical err .....

X X X X X X X

Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ier company and engages the employees who are expert in uploading e-way bills. As per the Rules, it is a mandatory requirement that Part-B must be updated in the e-way bill and in case the Part-B is not updated, the e-way bill is not genuine/legal and therefore, it is not a minor mistake or cannot be treated as a technical error when there is an option of raising a grievance on the GST portal itself. 15. The Assessing Officer as well as the learned Authority rejected the contention that they sho .....

X X X X X X X

Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ich he has directed the petitioner to pay the same towards the tax liability as well as the same amount towards penalty. 19. On 04.05.2018, an order was passed and being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, he filed an appeal, which was also dismissed and, thereafter, instant writ petition has been filed. 20. The contention of the petitioner before the learned Authority was that there was no intention on the part of the petitioner to evade payment of tax during Inter and Intra State Supply of Goods .....

X X X X X X X

Full Contents

X X X X X X X

In the case of VSL Alloys (India) Pvt. Ltd. (supra), the distance was within 50 kilometeres and, therefore, the petitioner therein was not under an obligation to fill the Part-B of the e-way bill and the Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court has rightly quashed the order. 23. In the present case, the distance was more than 1200-1300 kilometers and it is mandatory for the petitioner to file the Part-B of the e-way bill giving all the details including the vehicle number before the goods are .....

X X X X X X X

Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

← Previous Next →