By the Court.—By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India petitioners have challenged the authority of the State of U.P. for issuing the notification dated 21.7.2017 whereby which E-way bill-01 has been prescribed for the purposes of import of goods for an amount over and above Rs. 50,000/- from outside the State of U.P. into the State of U.P. under the newly introduced provisions of Goods and Service Tax Laws. The aforesaid aforesaid requirement has been prescribed by the State under Rule 138 of the U.P. Goods and Service Tax Rules (herein short ‘GST Rules’).

2. The questions involved in all the writ petitions are identical and for the facility, the facts of Writ Tax No. 41 of 2018 (M/s. Om Disposals, Dhanoura Road, Near J.P. Public School, Chandpur, Bijnor, U.P.) are being referred to.

3. We have noticed that the aforesaid writ petition has been filed in the month of January and while entertaining the said writ petition, this Court has granted time to the Standing Counsel for filing counter-affidavit but till date no counter-affidavit has been filed by any of the respondents.

4. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is proprietorship concerned and is engaged in the process of manufacturing of disposable paper cups, plates etc. The petitioner is registered under the provisions of GST Laws and the competent authority empowered to grant registration to a dealer has allotted GSTIN number to the petitioner. The petitioner manufacturing unit is situated near J.P. Public School, Chandpur, Bijnor, U.P.

5. An order was placed by the petitioner to M/s. JV Engineering Works, CB-103, Ring Road, Naraina, New Delhi for purchase of paper cup making machine. The said machine was to be dispatched by the seller situated at New Delhi to petitioner manufacturing unit situate at Bijnor (U.P.). The seller situated at New Delhi issued an advance receipt evidencing receipt of Rs. 7,08,000/- from the petitioner towards the supply of paper cup making machine. Due to some reason, delivery was delayed though advance payment has been made by the petitioner. After gap of certain period, dealer at Delhi has dispatched the machine without intimating the petitioner and has issued invoice No. 014 dated 18.11.2017. The goods were being transported by Lorry receipt dated 18.11.2017 issued by one M/s. Mithila Transport Service. The vehicle was intercepted by the Mobile Squad Officials and interception memo No. 106 dated 19.11.2017 was issued under Section 129(1) of the U.P. SGST Act, 2017. The reason specified/mentioned in the aforesaid interception memo was that the goods were being transported without E-way bill.

6. Consequential show-cause notice dated 20.11.2017 was issued under Section 129(3) of the Act which was served on the driver of the vehicle.

7. The contention of the learned counsel for petitioner is that the petitioner came to know about the dispatch of the goods only after interception by the Mobile Squad Authorities. Immediately after knowing the said interception and the defect indicated by the Mobile Squad Authorities, the petitioner generated E-way bill on 20.11.2017 itself.

8. The petitioner thereafter filed his reply on 20.11.2017 and has provided all supporting documents alongwith E-way bill which was generated by it in original.

9. On 22.11.2017, the consignment was seized eventually and penalty order was passed by the authority directing the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs. 1,08,000/- towards tax and sale amount towards penalty. The sole ground for passing the order was at the time of interception the goods were not accompanied with E-way bill-01.

10. Against the order dated 22.11.2017 appeal has been preferred by the petitioner before the Additional Commissioner, Grade-2 (Appeals)-1, State Taxes, Noida, which was dismissed by the appellate authority vide order dated 14.12.2017 mentioning therein the same reason as were mentioned by the Mobile Squad Authorities.

11. The contention of the