Penalty u/s129 WBGST Act for expired e-way bill upheld, writ relief under Article 226 denied

HC upheld the levy of penalty under s.129 of the WBGST Act, 2017 for transportation of goods with an expired e-way bill during 1 June 2019 to 30 June 2019. The Court found no procedural irregularity or breach of principles of natural justice in the adjudication or appellate proceedings. It held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate any legal provision exempting the transported goods from the requirement of an e-way bill. Finding no ground to invoke writ jurisdiction under Art. 226, the HC dismissed the petition.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to order imposing penalty for violation of e-way bill provision under WBGST Act.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged the order imposing a penalty for violating the e-way bill provision under the WBGST Act. The impugned order dated 27th August, 2019, upheld by the appellate authority, was passed under Section 129 of the WBGST Act, 2017. The penalty was imposed for not having an e-way bill at the time of interception of the goods on 17th June, 2019, as the e-way bill had expired its validity on 9th June, 2019.

Upon considering the submissions of the parties, the facts, the grounds of appeal, and the reasons provided by the appellate authority, the Court found no procedural irregularity, violation of natural justice, or actions contrary to law that would warrant invoking constitutional writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution. The Court specifically noted that the petitioner failed to demonstrate any specific provisions exempting the nature of the transported goods from requiring an e-way bill.

Consequently, the Court dismissed the writ petition (WPA 17452 of 2019) with no order as to costs. This judgment underscores the importance of compliance with statutory provisions, especially regarding e-way bills, and the need for parties to establish exemptions clearly under the law to avoid penalties.

---