TMI Blog2022 (5) TMI 740X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) TMI 889 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] where it was held that On close, scrutiny of the record reveals that in the State of Uttar Pradesh, requirement for central e-way bill was implemented with effect from 01.04.2008. At the time of detention of the goods, there was no requirement for carrying central e-way bill. Therefore, the goods cannot/should not be seized or penalty/tax could not be legally de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etitioner has not been disputed by learned Standing counsel. This Court in Writ Tax No. 898 of 2019 has observed as follows:- Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is a Proprietorship firm and duly registered under the U.P. Goods Service Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as, 'the Act'). In the normal course of business, the petitioner purchased concrete groove, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tral e-way bill to accompany the goods at the time of seizure. He further submits that e-way bill was introduced with effect from 01.04.2008; whereas, the goods in question were intercepted in January, 2008 in gross violation of the provisions of the Act. He prays for quashing of the impugned orders. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel supports the action and the impugned orders passed by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y/tax could not be legally demanded. The Division Bench of this Court in M/s Godrej Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd. Vs. State of U.P. Others reported in 2018 UPTC (100) 1206 has held that during the period from 01.02.2018 to 31.03.2018, the requirement of e-way bill under the U.P. GST Act read with Rules framed thereunder was unenforceable. Therefore, neither seizure of goods wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
