Upheld 100% Penalty for E-Way Bill Violation under CGST Act

The Court upheld the imposition of a 100% penalty under the CGST Act for transporting goods without an e-way bill. The petitioner's challenge to the seizure of plywood sheets and the penalty was dismissed, with the Court finding the 3rd respondent's order legally valid and in compliance with the law. The petitioner's admission of not having an e-way bill supported the penalty imposition, leading to the dismissal of the writ petition without costs, advising the petitioner to pursue available remedies.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to seizure of plywood sheets under AP GST Act, imposition of 100% penalty for not having e-way bill, legality of order under CGST Act.

Analysis:
The petitioner sought a Writ of Mandamus to challenge the seizure of 80 plywood sheets worth Rs. 54,548 despite paying taxes, citing it as illegal under the AP GST Act. The petitioner, engaged in plywood business, inadvertently transported the goods without an e-way bill, resulting in the 3rd respondent imposing a 100% penalty on the tax already paid. The petitioner contended that the penalty was burdensome, especially during the pandemic, and requested its removal. The Govt. Pleader supported the penalty citing CGST Act provisions.

The Court examined Section 129 of the CGST Act, which mandates detention and seizure of goods for contravention of tax provisions. The 3rd respondent correctly applied this section due to the absence of an e-way bill for the goods, leading to the imposition of 100% penalty. The Court noted that the petitioner admitted the lack of e-way bill, making the penalty applicable. The Court found the 3rd respondent's order legally sound and in compliance with the law, thus dismissing the writ petition and advising the petitioner to pursue available remedies without costs.

In conclusion, the judgment upheld the imposition of the 100% penalty under the CGST Act for transporting goods without an e-way bill. The Court emphasized the legal validity of the 3rd respondent's order, highlighting the petitioner's acknowledgment of the non-compliance. The dismissal of the writ petition signifies the Court's stance on the penalty imposition and the petitioner's recourse to appeal options provided by the law.

---