M/S New Garg Roadlines vs. Commissioner

CW/670/2023HC RajasthanGSTCNR RJHC02000579202328 January 2025Bench: AVNEESH JHINGAN,SHUBHA MEHTA2 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

Facts

M/s New Garg Roadlines, through its proprietor Shyam Lal Garg, filed a writ petition before the Rajasthan High Court. The petition challenged the levy of penalty under Section 129 of the Rajasthan Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017/Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, read with Section 20 of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner was also aggrieved by the dismissal of their appeal by the First Appellate Authority. The penalty was imposed during a roadside check, alleging that the goods were not accompanied by the requisite documents. The court noted that the writ involved disputed questions of fact.

Held

The Court acknowledged that the writ petition involved disputed questions of fact, specifically concerning the alleged absence of requisite documents during a roadside check, which led to the imposition of penalty under Section 129 of the GST Acts. Given that the Tribunal was non-functional at the time of the judgment, the Court decided not to delve into the disputed facts. Instead, it relegated the petitioner to the statutory remedy of appeal before the Tribunal. The Court granted the petitioner liberty to file an appeal within three months of the Tribunal's constitution, and such an appeal would be considered within the period of limitation. The Court did not decide on the merits of the penalty or the appellate authority's order.

Key Issues

1. Whether the penalty imposed under Section 129 of the Rajasthan Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017/Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, read with Section 20 of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, is valid, considering the alleged absence of requisite documents during a roadside check? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner, M/s New Garg Roadlines, challenged the penalty and the appellate authority's dismissal, implying that the penalty was wrongly imposed or that the procedural requirements were not met. The nature of their specific arguments regarding the documents or the imposition process is not detailed in the judgment. Respondent's Contention: The respondents, the Commissioner, State Tax, Rajasthan, and the Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, are understood to have upheld the penalty and the dismissal of the appeal, based on the finding that the goods were not accompanied by the requisite documents during the roadside check.

Sections Cited

Section 129, Section 20

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

[2025:RJ-JP:3841-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 670/2023 M/s New Garg Roadlines, Head Office At A.S. 31, Sanjay Gandhi Transport Nagar, Delhi - 42 Thorugh Its Proprietor Shyam Lal Garg S/o Shri Ram Avtar Garg, Aged About 43 Years, R/o Plot No. Rz708, Gali No. 16, Sadh Nagar, Palan Colony Delhi- 45. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Commissioner, State Tax, Goods And Service Tax, State Of Rajasthan, Ambedkar Circle, Jaipur. 2. Appellate Authority, State Tax Jaipur First, Jaipur. 3. Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, Ward No. 1, Circle-C, Alwar. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ramesh Chandra Agarwal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sandeep Taneja, AAG with Mr. Aditya Sharma HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SHUBHA MEHTA

Order 28/01/2025

This petition is filed aggrieved of levy of penalty under Section 129 of the Rajasthan Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017/ Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 read with Section 20 of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the dismissal of the appeal by the First Appellate Authority.

The writ involves disputed questions of fact as the penalty was imposed on a road side checking when allegedly goods were not accompanied by the requisite documents.

[2025:RJ-JP:3841-DB] (2 of 2) [CW-670/2023]

The petition is disposed of relegating the petitioner to remedy of appeal before the Tribunal taking into account that the Tribunal as on date is non-functional. The petitioner shall be at liberty to file appeal within three months of the Constitution of the Tribunal and in that scenario appeal to be filed be treated within limitation.

Pending application(s) stand disposed of. (SHUBHA MEHTA),J (AVNEESH JHINGAN),J RIYA/91

Reproduced from the public record of the Rajasthan High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.