Back
ARINDAM MUKHERJEE
Mohammad Shamasher – Appellant
Versus
State of West Bengal – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Arindam Mukherjee, J.
The present writ petition has been filed inter alia praying for recalling and/or cancelling and/or rescinding the penalty imposed by an order dated 27th March, 2024 passed by the Adjudicating Authority under Section 129(3) of the West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the WBGST Act) pursuant to a direction given by this Court vide an order dated 1st February, 2024 passed in WPA 85 of 2024.
1. Facts of the case:
a) One unregistered person (in short URP) namely Pisi Suriya Singhpo of Arunachal Pradesh was returning a Hyundai make Excavator machine (hereinafter referred to as JCB) to the petitioner at its place of business at Gaya, Bihar. The petitioner holds a GSTN number being 10BMYPS0695E1ZP. The said JCB had been taken on hire from the petitioner for road excavation work.
b) On 18th April, 2023 an E-way bill was generated by the petitioner for transportation of the said JCB as “inward job work returns”. A consignment note was generated by Pisi Suriya Singhpo ( hereinafter referred to as the Consignor) wherein the consignee was the petitioner. The place of dispatch was indicated to be Changlang Miao, Arunachal Pradesh an
The court upheld the penalty imposed under the WBGST Act, ruling that the petitioner failed to provide necessary documentation during the transport of goods.
For imposition of penalties under the GST Act, intent to evade tax must be established; mere expiration of documents does not suffice.
Minor errors in e-way bills do not justify detention under Section 129 of the CGST Act if the goods are otherwise properly documented.
Intention to evade tax is a prerequisite for imposing penalties under GST Act; mere technical issues should not warrant such penalties.
Minor documentation discrepancies do not imply intent to evade tax, and valid transport documents render penalty imposition inappropriate.
Minor procedural lapses in compliance with tax regulations should not attract severe penalties, especially when there is no intent to evade tax.
Procedural compliance in tax documentation is mandatory; failure to fill an e-way bill's section warrants penalty under tax law.
E-way bill is mandatory for transporting goods; failure to carry it raises a presumption of tax evasion, which must be rebutted by the transporter.
Minor discrepancies in transport documentation do not warrant penalties under Section 129 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, with general penalties appropriately applied instead under Section....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
