CGST part-B non-filing was treated under section 126 rather than penalty under section 129, following binding precedent.

Non-filing of Part-B was treated as falling within section 126(1) of the CGST/SGST Act, 2017 rather than attracting penalty under section 129(1), in line with an earlier binding judgment on the same issue. As the controversy was already covered by that controlling decision, the writ petition was disposed of by applying its ratio and the proceedings were not independently sustained in this petition, with consequential relief following the earlier ruling.

---

---

Issues: Whether the non-filing of Part-B could be treated as a matter falling under section 126(1) of the CGST/SGST Act, 2017 rather than attracting penalty under section 129(1), and whether the proceedings against the petitioner should be dropped with consequential release of goods.

Analysis: The parties accepted that the controversy was squarely covered by an earlier judgment dated 31.10.2018 in a connected writ petition. The writ petition was accordingly disposed of by applying the ratio of that decision.

Conclusion: The issue was answered in favour of the petitioner, and the proceedings were not sustained independently in this writ petition.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition was disposed of by following the earlier controlling decision, with the petitioner obtaining the benefit of that ruling.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the controversy is already covered by an earlier binding decision on the same issue, the Court may dispose of the writ petition by applying that ratio without separate elaboration.

---