Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:201258

Reserved

Court No. - 5

Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 721 of 2020

Petitioner :- M/S Millennium Impex Pvt. Ltd.

Respondent :- Additional Commissioner Grade-2 (Appeal) - I State Tax,

Noida And 2 Others

Counsel for Petitioner :- Suyash Agarwal

Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.,Anant Kumar Tiwari,C.S.C.

HON’BLE PIYUSH AGRAWAL, J.

1.

Heard Mr. Suyash Agarwal for the petitioner, Mr. Rishi Kumar,

learned A.C.S.C. for respondent nos. 1 and 2 and Mr. A.K. Tiwari for

respondent no. 3.

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 31.8.2020 passed by respondent no. 1 in Appeal No. GST-113/19 A.Y.

2019-20 dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner.

4.

Brief facts of the case as stated, are that the petitioner being a

registered company incorporated under the Companies Act having GSTIN

No. 07AACCM3279J1Z8 as well as duly certified by ISO 9001:2015. The

petitioner is a verified seller of supreme quality of metal seated zero leakage

Ball Valves and purchaser of Ball Valve, Diaphragm Valves in bulk. In the

normal course of business, the petitioner has made outward supply of Rotor

Assembly Elmo and Complete Assy-CL 3001 to NTPC Ltd, Ramagundam

Super Thermal Power Station, P.O. Jyotinagar, Distt. Pedapalli, Telangana

vide Tax Invoice No. 0000781/19-20 dated 14.8.2019 and the said goods

2

were being transported from New Delhi to Telangana via Agra, U.P. , where the

same was intercepted by respondent no. 2 at Saiyan, Agra, U.P. on 16.8.2019 and

after physical verification of the goods, it was found that part B of the e-way bill

accompanying with the goods, was not filled on which notice was issued

proposing to impose tax @ 18 % i.e. Rs. 14,63,063/- along with equal amount of

penalty. Thereafter on deposit of impugned tax along with penalty, the goods in

question were released and respondent no. 2 vide order dated 21.8.2019 passed

the penalty order in Form GST MOV 09 under Section 20 of IGST read with

Section 129 (3) of CGST Act observing that part B of e-way bill was not filled,

hence the seizure of the goods was valid. Feeling aggrieved to the said order, the

petitioner has filed an appeal which was dismissed by respondent no. 1 by order

dated 31.8.2020. Hence the present writ petition.

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that goods in question

was sold by one registered dealer to another registered dealer and same was

accompanying with genuine tax invoices, GR, e-way bill; the authorities ought

not to have seized the goods on technical glitch. He further submitted that merely

because part B of e-way bill was not filled, which was required to be filled by the

transporter, the proceedings has wrongly been initiated against the petitioner. It

was further argued that there was no intention to evade the payment of tax; once

the authorities have not recorded any finding of fact in respect of any intention to

evade the payment of tax, the impugned order is not justified in the eyes of law

and same is liable to the quashed.

6.

In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner has relied

upon the Division Bench judgement of this Court in Ram Dev Trading

Company Vs. State of U.P. (Writ Tax No. 779 of 2017, decided on 30.1.2017),

which was affirmed by the Apex Court in Special Leave to Appeal (c ) No.

18781 of 2018 decided on 27.7.2018. He further relied upon the Division Bench

judgement of this Court in VSL Alloy (India) Pvt. Ltd. (Writ Tax No. 637 of

2018 decided on 13.4.2018) as well as Single Judge Bench of this Court in the

case of M/s Citykart Retail Pvt. Ltd. Vs. C.C.T. (Writ C No. 22285 of 2019

decided on 6.9.2022) and Shyam Sel and