January 2019

GOODS AND SERVICEs TAX (GST)

Puloma Dalal / Jayesh Gogri / Mandar Telang
Chartered Accountants

I.    HIGH COURT

 

14.   2018 [17] G.S.T.L. 191 (All.) VSL Alloys (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of U.P. and Ors. Date of Order 13th April, 2018

 

Mere non-disclosure of vehicle No. in Part-B of E-way Bill cannot be a ground for seizure of the goods as well as vehicle.

 

FACTS

 

 

During the movement of the goods from petitionerís factory upto the transporterís premise for further transportation, the vehicle was intercepted. On perusing the documents produced, it was found that Part-B of the E-way bill was incomplete. On finding such irregularity, Order was passed u/s. 129 (1) detaining the vehicle as well as goods and levying tax liability and penalty. The Petitioner relying on third proviso of Rule 138(3) of CGST Rules, 2017 contested that the filing of Part B of E-way bill was optional where goods are transported from place of business of consignor to the place of business of the transporter for further transportation. The Respondent (Department) though admitted that all the requisite documents were accompanied the goods when the vehicle has been intercepted. Aggrieved Petitioner filed writ petition before the Honíble High Court.

--->

Past Issues

Flip-Book
HTML View
Current Issue