M/S Sarvottam Rolling Mills PVT. LTD. vs. State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Held
The Court directed the immediate release of the seized goods and vehicle. This decision was based on the understanding that the E-Way Bill had expired only shortly before the seizure, and the goods had reached their destination in time. The inability to enter the city, which led to the detention, was considered a mitigating factor. The release was made conditional upon the petitioner furnishing security in the form of a bank guarantee equivalent to the amount prescribed under Section 129(1) of the U.P. GST Act. The Court disposed of the writ petition with this observation. The specific amount in dispute was not explicitly stated in the judgment.
Facts
The petitioner, M/s Sarvottam Rolling Mills Pvt. Ltd., is the owner of goods transported from Muzaffarnagar to Hapur. The goods were seized under Section 129(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Goods Services Tax Act, 2017, because the E-Way Bill had expired. The E-Way Bill expired at midnight on November 21, 2018, and the seizure occurred approximately one hour later. The petitioner's counsel argued that the goods had reached the destination in time, but the vehicle could not enter the city due to a lack of entry, leading to the detention order.
Key Issues
1. Whether the seizure of goods and vehicle under Section 129(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Goods Services Tax Act, 2017, was justified when the E-Way Bill expired shortly before the seizure, and the goods had reached the destination in time but could not enter the city due to logistical issues? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that they are the owners of the goods and the E-Way Bill expired only an hour before the seizure. They further contended that the goods had reached their destination on time, but the vehicle was detained due to an inability to enter the city, not due to any deliberate evasion of tax. Respondent's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondents (State of U.P. and 2 Others).
Sections Cited
Section 129(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Court No. - 29 Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 1530 of 2018 Petitioner :- M/S Sarvottam Rolling Mills Pvt. Ltd.
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shubham Agrawal Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Pankaj Mithal,J.
Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.
Heard Sri Shubham Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri C.B. Tripathi, Special Counsel appearing for the respondents.
The goods of the petitioner, which were coming from Muzaffarnagar to Hapur, were seized under section 129(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Goods Services Tax Act, 2017 for the reason that the E-Way Bill had expired.
The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is the owner of the goods. The E-Way Bill had expired in the midnight on 21.11.2018 and goods were seized one hour after the expiry of the said time.
The goods had reached at the destination in time but on account of no entry, the vehicle could not enter into the city. In the meantime, the detention order was passed. I view of the above, we direct that the seized goods and the vehicles be released forthwith on furnishing security in the form of bank guarantee of the amount equivalent to that as prescribed unde
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Allahabad High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.