Back
PIYUSH AGRAWAL
Galaxy Enterprises – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Piyush Agrawal, J.
Heard Mr. Pranjal Shukla for the petitioner and Mr. Rishi Kumar, learned A.C.S.C. for State-respondents.
2. The instant Writ Tax is being entertained by this Court in view of the fact that G.S.T. Tribunal is not functional in the State of Uttar Pradesh pursuant to the Gazette notification of the Central Government bearing number CG-DL-E-14092023-248743 dated 14.09.2023.
3. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner is assailing the order dated 27.1.2022 passed by Assistant Commissioner, Mobile Squad, State Goods and Services Tax, Khataunil Unit Muzaffarnagar, respondent no. 3 and the order dated 2.7.2022 passed by Additional Commissioner, Grade -2 (Appeal), State Goods and Services Tax Muzaffarnagar, respondent no. 2.
4. Brief facts of the case as stated, are that the petitioner is a proprietorship concerned having GSTIN No. 09AAPFG6376E1ZY and engaged in the business of manufacturing and sale of laminated papers. In the normal course of business, the goods were loaded on Truck no. RJ 01 GC 4269 for dispatch from Muzaffarnagar to Rajasthan along with tax invoices, E-way Bills and GR. During transit, the goods were intercepted on 25.1.2022 and Form GST
Production of rectifying documents before detention of goods negates grounds for penalty under GST rules, reaffirming procedural fairness.
Detention and seizure of goods in transit under GST requires clear evidence of contravention; mere discrepancies in documentation cannot justify such actions.
Authorities must substantiate claims of tax evasion in goods seizure cases; mere suspicions are insufficient without concrete evidence.
Failure to provide notice for adverse inferences violates principles of natural justice, leading to quashing of penalty and order.
For proceedings under section 129 of the UPGST Act, there must be intent to evade tax established; a mere technical breach does not warrant penalties.
The absence of requisite documentation, such as the E-way Bill, does not justify detention and consequent penalties when prior judicial authority negates such action.
For imposition of penalties under the GST Act, intent to evade tax must be established; mere expiration of documents does not suffice.
Intent to evade tax is a necessary condition for proceedings under Sections 129 and 130 of the CGST Act; absence of such intent invalidates penalties imposed under these sections.
Intention to evade tax is a prerequisite for imposing penalties under GST Act; mere technical issues should not warrant such penalties.
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
