No e-way payments prerequisite for the duration of 01.02.2018 to 31.03.2018: HC Quashes Penalty

Hira Lal Arun Kumar Vs Condition of U.P. (Allahabad Substantial Courtroom)
In a important ruling, the Allahabad Large Court dealt with penalties imposed less than the U.P. GST Act for transporting products with no an e-way monthly bill.  The circumstance revolved close to the imposition of penalties by the Assistant Commissioner below the U.P. GST Act, 2017. The petitioner, citing the period among February 2018 and March 2018, argued that the need for e-way payments was unenforceable, referencing a precedent from the courtroom in M/s Godrej and Boyce Production Co. Ltd vs Condition of U.P.
The High Courtroom concurred with the petitioner’s stance, emphasizing that for the duration of the pointed out period, the enforcement of e-way costs was not lawfully tenable. Hence, the penalties imposed on the petitioner for transporting items without having an e-way invoice had been considered unjustified. The courtroom also famous procedural irregularities in dismissing the petitioner’s appeal, which additional supported the quashing of penalties.
Based mostly on the interpretation of the regulation and precedents, the Allahabad Significant Courtroom authorized the writ petition, thus quashing the penalty orders dated March 20, 2018, and April 26, 2019. It directed the refund of any deposited quantities by the petitioner within just one particular thirty day period. This judgment reinforces the relevance of lawful clarity and adherence to statutory provisions in issues relating to GST and e-way costs.
Whole Textual content OF THE JUDGMENT/Order OF ALLAHABAD Superior Court
1. Heard Sri Vishwjit, realized counsel for the petitioner and acquired Standing Counsel for the profits.
2. Challenge has been lifted to the buy dated April 26, 2019 passed by the respondent no.2, Extra Commissioner Quality-II (Attraction)-I, Business Tax, Saharanpur, less than Segment 107(4) of U.P. GST Act, 2017 and also the get dated March 20, 2018 passed by respondent no.3, Assistant Commissioner Incharge (Cell Squad Device-II), Saharanpur.
3. By the impugned buy dated March 20, 2018, penalty has been imposed with respect to the merchandise staying transported devoid of e-way invoice less than U.P. GST Act, 2017 go through with Principles framed thereunder.
4. Relying on a selection of Division Bench of this Courtroom in M/s Godrej and Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd vs Point out of U.P. and other people described in 2018 U.P.T.C.[Vol.100]-1206, it has been submitted, in the course of the period of time 01.02.2018 to 31.03.2018 the need of e-way invoice beneath U.P. GST Act study with Policies framed thereunder was unenforceable. Consequently, neither seizure of items was justified nor can the penalty be sustained. Also, the petitioner’s attraction from the get dated march 3, 2018 arrived to be dismissed on account of delay beyond the period eligible for condonation of delay.
5. Getting listened to the uncovered counsel for the get-togethers and perused the file, so much as the make a difference is squarely covered by a determination of Division Bench of this Court docket in M/s Godrej and Boyce Production Co. Ltd (supra), with which we are in settlement, the current writ petition is allowed. The impugned purchase dated April 26, 2019 and also the purchase dated March 20, 2018 are hereby quashed.
6. Any sum deposited by the petitioner may well be refunded in accordance with legislation within just a time period of a single thirty day period.