Bharti Airtel LTD. Thru. D.G.M. Purna Pratap Dwivedi vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Tax And Registration Lko. And Ors.
Held
The Court held that Section 129 of the CGST Act does not empower the proper officer to determine tax liability or impose penalty. Such determination can only be done under Sections 73 or 74 of the Act. Therefore, the orders passed under Section 129 for determining tax and penalty were illegal.
Facts
The petitioner's goods were intercepted due to an inadvertent omission in generating Part-B of the e-way bill. Despite the Part-B being generated before the detention order, authorities proceeded to detain the goods and subsequently issued a show cause notice. The petitioner's reply was disregarded, and tax and penalty were imposed under Section 129 of the CGST Act.
Key Issues
Whether the proper officer has the power under Section 129 of the CGST Act to determine tax liability and impose penalty, or if such determination must be done under other specified sections of the Act.
Sections Cited
Section 129, Section 73, Section 74, Section 122
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
AFR
Court No. - 18 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 6620 of 2021 Petitioner :- Bharti Airtel Ltd. Thru. D.G.M. Purna Pratap Dwivedi Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Tax And Registration Lko. and Ors. Counsel for Petitioner :- Manju Lata Mishra, Ashish Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.
Supplementary Affidavit filed by the petitioner is taken on record.
Heard Sri Ashish Mishra, the counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel, who appears for the respondents.
The present petition has been filed challenging the order dated 17.10.2018 purportedly to be passed in exercise of the power under Section 129 of the CGST Act as well as the order dated 31.10.2020 passed by the respondent no.4 whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner has been dismissed.
The counsel for the petitioner states that as the Tribunal contemplated under the Act has not been constituted, as such, the petitioner is availing the remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and the same is being entertained in view of the admitted position that the Tribunal contemplated under the Act has not been constituted till date.
The facts, in brief, are
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.