Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2020 (3) TMI 729

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... validity period after uploading the detail in part B of the FORM GST EWB-01, if required'. Therefore appellant should have updated the part B of EWB before resuming his journey further. So keeping in view the above facts the appellant is liable to pay miner penalty. The instant appeal is accepted and the order passed by Assistant Commissioner State Taxes Excise-cum- Proper Officer, Central Enforcement Zone Una dated 06.11.2018 is set aside. The tax and penalty deposited by the appellant under section 129(3) may be refunded and a penalty of Rs Ten Thousand only (₹ 10,000/-) is imposed on the taxpayer under section 122(xiv) of the Act. - 012/2019 Endst. No. EXN-005/2019-AA/GST Shimla HP- 3153 to 58 - - - Dated:- 14-2-2020 - Shri Rohit Chauhan, Additional Commissioner of State Taxes Excise (GR-I)-cum-Appellate Authority GST (Appeals) Sh. Rajeev Prabhakar, Advocate for the appellant. Shri. Sanjay Kumar, ACST E, Proper Officer for the Department. ORDER At the outset, I would like to make it clear that the provisions of both the Himachal Pradesh Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 and Central Goods Service Ac .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the CGST Act, 2017 imposed upon the appellant is against the law and facts of the case. ii) That the Ld. ACST E, has erred in levy of tax and penalty of ₹ 1,43,432/- equal to 100% of the tax and penalty payable on goods U/s 129 (3) of the CGST Act, 2017 and same is liable to be deleted/cancelled. iii) That the Ld. ACST E has wrongly invoked the provisions of Section 129 (3) of the CGST Act 2017 for minor mistake in the updation of vehicle no. in E-way bill; for which lessor penalty u/s 126 of the CGST Act 2017 is prescribed w.r.t an omission or mistake in documentation which is easily rectifiable. That there is only minor mistake on the part of the appellant in updation of new vehicle number arranged (after the first one break down in the way) for carriage of goods in the E-way bill challan and that too due to week internet connectively which is beyond the hands of appellant. The Ld. ACST E should have taken lenient view in the case of appellant as per the principles set by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Hindustan Steel Ltd. Vs. State of Orissa AIR 1970 SC 25325STC211 where it was observed as under: The discretion to impose penalty must be exercised judici .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ake of penalty; hence the tax and penalty levied of ₹ 1,43,432/- vide order dated 06-11-2018 is liable to be deleted/cancelled. The appellant relied upon the following case Laws :- a) Bhumika Enterprises (2018) 92 Taxmann.com 343 (Allahabad). b) Durga Rai Vijay Kumar vs. Union of India (2017) 01 CCHGST 0044 (All. HC) c) Indus Tower Vs. the Astt. State Tax Officer 2018 (1) TMI 1313 - KERALA HIGH d) Singh Tyres vs. State of UP (2018) 56 GSTR All-38. That the appellant craves leave to amend, alter or argue any other grounds of appeal with the permission of Hon'ble court before the final hearing on merits. Point wise reply from Respondent: 5. On 06.11.2018 a naka was placed by the team of (CEZ) Una comprising of one ACST E two ASTEO near e-validation centre Mehatpur, a Vehicle number PB 12 T 1910 came from Punjab side moving towards Una was directed to stop the vehicle and fled away. Our team intercepted the vehicle near RTO barrier and brought back the vehicle to the original place of the naka. The driver of vehicle was asked to furnish the documents of the consignment, in turn he produced the tax invoice issued by M/s Motor Hea .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ds in movement, and detention, release and confiscation of such goods and conveyances and any breach of this section and rule mentioned above attracts penal section 129 (1) of the Act and this case was fall under this section as the wrong mention of complete No. of vehicle No. is not a minor mistake. This case also not covers under even circular No. 64 issued for the modification of procedure for interception of conveyances for inspection of goods in movement, and detention, release and confiscation of such goods and conveyances, as clarified in circular Nos. 41/15/2018-GST dated 13-04-2018 and 49/23/2018 GST dated 21-06-2018, which provides relaxation of proceeding under section 129, if there is error in one or two digits/characters of vehicle number and penalty to the tune of ₹ 500/- each under section 125 of CGST Act and the respective State GST Act should be imposed (₹ 1000/- under IGST Act) in FORM GST DRC-07 for each consignment. As far the question of section 126 of HPGST/CGST Act, 2017 is concerned, this section is related to the General disciplines related to penalty and sub-section (6) of this section says that the provisions of this section shall not apply .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t of the consignment. He produced the tax invoice issued by the M/s Motor Heaven Nangal to M/s Motor Heaven Pvt. Ltd. Hoshiarpur Punjab which indicates value including GST itself. The driver asked some time to produce e-way bill and after some time he produced it and on which vehicle no. mentioned does not match. The appellant explained that due to break down of the vehicle no. PB12N-2248 the goods have been shifted to new vehicle no. PB12T-1910 and the updation of new vehicle in the already generated e-way bill could not be done due to weak internet connectivity. The respondent detained the intercepted vehicle and starts proceeding under section 129(3) of CGST/HP GST Act; 2017 and imposed a tax/penalty amounting to ₹ 1,43,432. In between the appellant has also updated the part -B of e-way bill at 09:47 a.m. dated 06.11.2018. 7. I have heard both the parties and have perused the record available of the case. It appears that there is no dispute regarding quantity of goods and further all concerns documents were placed before the proper officer. It is a fact that The E Way bill for the goods in question was generated at 09:43 pm on 05-11-2018 in which all relevant detail .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates