M/S Jasvant Singh vs. State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Held
The Court held that the requirement for a central e-way bill in Uttar Pradesh was implemented after the date of interception. Therefore, the seizure of goods and the demand for tax and penalty were not legally justified.
Facts
Goods were intercepted and seized during transit from Maharashtra to Uttar Pradesh on the ground that a central e-way bill was not accompanying them. The petitioner argued that all required documents were present and the central e-way bill was not mandatory at the time of interception.
Key Issues
Whether the seizure of goods and imposition of tax/penalty were justified when a central e-way bill was not accompanying the goods, given the implementation date of e-way bill provisions in the state.
Sections Cited
Section 129(1), Section 129(3), Section 7
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Court No. - 1 Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 898 of 2019 Petitioner :- M/S Jasvant Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Aditya Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Jagdish Mishra Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J.
Heard Shri Aditya Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri A.C. Tripathi, learned counsel for the State - respondents.
By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for following, amongst other, reliefs:- "I. Issue a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order / information dated 16.02.2019 passed by the respondent no. 3 (Annexure No. 12 to the writ petition); II. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no. 3 to accept the appeal filed by the petitioner and the same may be decided on merits; III. Issue a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned interception memo dated 06.01.2018, consequential seizure order dated 06.01.2018 passed by the respondent no. 4 under Section 129(1) of Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, consequential notice dated 06.01.2018 issued by respondent no. 4 und
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.