Back
2022 Supreme(Tri) 301
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AGARTALA
I. Mahanty, CJ., S.G. Chattopadhyay, J.
Podder & Podder Industries Private Limited - Appellant
Versus
State of Tripura & Ors. - Respondents
WP(C) No. 285 of 2022
Decided On : 29-03-2022
B.N. Majumder, Sr. Advocate, D.J. Saha, S.C. Sen and Bikash Paul, Advocates, for the Appellant; Debalay Bhattacharya, G.A, Asish Nandy and P. Saha, Advocates, for the Respondents
The court ruled that technicalities like e-way bill expiry should not hinder the movement of goods between registered dealers if the transaction's genuineness is established.
Headnote:(A) Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - Rule 138(10) - E-way bill - Petitioner sought release of vehicle and goods seized due to expired e-way bill during transit - Court emphasized that bona fide transactions between registered dealers should not be impeded by technicalities of e-way bill expiry. (Paras 2, 4, 5)
(B) Legal Principle - The court highlighted that the movement of goods should be facilitated, and if the genuineness of the transaction is not in question, authorities should allow goods to continue transit with appropriate undertakings from the parties involved. (Paras 5, 6)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner, engaged in selling construction machinery, transported goods from Assam to Tripura, facing seizure due to an expired e-way bill when the vehicle broke down. (Para 1)
Findings of Court:
The court found that an undertaking could be accepted from the buyer or seller, allowing for the release of the vehicle and goods. (Para 8)
Issues: Whether a vehicle should be seized by authorities for transporting goods with an expired e-way bill despite the transaction's genuineness. (Para 4)
Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that impeding legitimate trade due to technicalities should be avoided to foster economic development, suggesting the need for regulatory reconsideration of e-way bill timelines. (Paras 6, 7)
Result: Writ petition allowed, directing release of vehicle and goods upon submission of an undertaking.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the case (Para 1) |
| 2. arguments on the validity of e-way bill (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. court's analysis of e-way bill regulations (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 4. conclusion and directions for compliance (Para 8 , 9) |
JUDGMENT
I. Mahanty; CJ. - This writ petition has come to be filed by the petitioner-Podder and Podder Industries Pvt. Ltd. which is engaged in the business of selling of construction machinery. It is submitted that the petitioner sold certain construction materials to a buyer in Agartala from Silchar (State of Assam) and the said machine was transported through a truck/trailer bearing registration No. HR 38 Z - 6075 and the said vehicle was used to transport the materials from Silchar to Agartala. It is asserted by the counsel for the petitioner that the vehicle was carrying all valid documents pertaining to the machinery sold including the sale invoice, temporary registration certificate, insurance policy and e-way bill No. 8612 1401 9866 valid up to 17.03.2022. It is further submitted that on the way the vehicle under which the goods were being transported, faced certain technical problems and when the vehicle reached at Churaibari on 18.03.2022 by the said time the e-way bill has expired. For this reason, the vehicle was detained and ultimately on 18.03.2022 the driver in-charge of the vehicle was informed with a direction of seizure of both the vehicle as well as the goods concerned. Since the vehicle and goods concerned are remained in stopped at the entry point into the State of Tripura, the present writ petition has come to be filed seeking release of the vehicle and the goods noted hereinabove.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the e-way bill under which the goods were being moved from Silchar to Agartala was issued by the buyer namely, Sri Swapan Chandra Dey who is a registered contractor in the State of Tripura and the buyer purchased the said equipment from the petitioner for the purpose of utilizing the same to enable Sri Dey to carry out his contractual obligation to the State of Tripura under certain contract entered into by him. Accordingly, he submits that seizure and detection of the vehicle at the entry point into the State of Tripura has caused an impediment on the free-flow of goods and services within the Union of India. In any event, learned counsel for the petitioner brings to our notice that the petitioner and/or the buyer only had an 8-hour window of Rule 138, sub-rule (10) of the GST Rules, 2017 to seek any extension thereof. Therefore, he submits that the denial of entry of the vehicle into the State of Tripura on the aforesaid plea, as noted hereinabove, amounts to an impediment on the free-flow of goods and services.
3. On the other hand, Shri Debalay Bhattacharya, learned Government Advocate contended that since the petitioner has admitted that the e-way bill issued by him had expired on 17.03.2022 and the date of entry was 18.03.2022, it was obligatory on part of the transporter and/or the buyer to make necessary prayer for extension of time in the e-way bill and since the e-way bill had expired, the authority under the GST Act at the check gate was left with no other alternative other than to stop the vehicle and to effect seizure of both the vehicle as well as the goods concerned.
4. Similar instances have been noticed by this Court in the past. We are constraint to note that any impact on the free-flow of goods and services (bona fide) ought to be encouraged and not discouraged since the free-flow and movement of goods and services throughout the Union of India is meant to be for the purpose of development of the nation. No doubt the rule making authorities have the authority to put conditions such as requirement of an e-way bill to cover the goods that have been transported. However, it must not be lost sight of the fact that an e-way bill has supplied to cover the goods under the transit by a registered dealer under the GST Act. Learne
