2023 (11) TMI 813 - HC - GST

Goods Transport Penalty Nullified: E-Way Bill Enforcement Deemed Invalid During Specific Timeframe, Full Refund Ordered

HC quashed penalty orders for transporting goods without e-way bill during a specific period. Following precedent in M/s Varun Beverages, the court ruled ... Enforceability of e-way bill requirement - penalty for transporting goods without e-way bill - precedential effect of Division Bench judgments - refund of deposits on quashing of ordersEnforceability of e-way bill requirement - penalty for transporting goods without e-way bill - precedential effect of Division Bench judgments - refund of deposits on quashing of orders - Impugned orders imposing penalty and related orders in respect of goods transported without e-way bill for the period 01.02.2018 to 31.03.2018 are unsustainable and liable to be quashed; amounts deposited to be refunded. - HELD THAT: - The Court applied the law laid down by earlier Division Bench decisions in M/s Godrej and Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd. and M/s Varun Beverages Limited, which held that the requirement of an e-way bill under the U.P. GST enactment was unenforceable for the period 01.02.2018 to 31.03.2018. The respondents did not contest the applicability of those precedents and conceded their finality. In light of those binding Division Bench rulings, the impugned orders imposing penalty for transport without an e-way bill were quashed. The Court directed that any sums deposited by the petitioner pursuant to the impugned orders be refunded in accordance with law within one month.Impugned orders dated 22.12.2020 and 12.02.2018 quashed; amounts deposited to be refunded within one month.Final Conclusion: Writ petition allowed: penalties and orders imposing penalty for absence of e-way bill during 01.02.2018 to 31.03.2018 quashed in view of binding Division Bench precedents; deposits to be refunded in accordance with law within one month. Issues:The issues involved in the judgment are the imposition of penalty for transporting goods without an e-way bill under the U.P. G.S.T. Act, 2017 during a specific period.Imposition of Penalty:The petitioner challenged the orders imposing penalties for transporting goods without an e-way bill under the U.P. G.S.T. Act, 2017. The Division Bench referred to previous judgments, including in the case of M/s Varun Beverages, where it was held that during the period in question, the requirement of an e-way bill was unenforceable. The court agreed with this interpretation and quashed the impugned orders, stating that the penalty could not be sustained.Benefit of Previous Judgments:The petitioner was granted the benefit of the judgment in the case of M/s Varun Beverages, where it was established that the requirement of an e-way bill during the relevant period was unenforceable. The court decided the writ petition in line with the legal principles laid down in the M/s Varun Beverages case.Quashing of Orders and Refund:The High Court quashed the impugned orders dated 22.12.2020 and 12.02.2018, and directed that any amount deposited by the petitioner should be refunded within one month. The writ petition was allowed in favor of the petitioner.