State E-way bill requirement unenforceable for the relevant period; seizure proceedings quashed and deposited amount ordered refunded.

Proceedings for absence of a State E-way bill during 01.02.2018 to 31.03.2018 were unsustainable where the goods were otherwise accompanied by a tax invoice, Central E-way bill and builty, and the only defect was non-availability of the State E-way bill under the Uttar Pradesh GST regime. Relying on earlier binding decisions, the High Court treated the State E-way bill requirement for that period as unenforceable, so the seizure and consequential proceedings were without jurisdiction and could not survive. The impugned orders were quashed and the amount deposited pursuant to them was directed to be refunded.

---

---

Issues: Whether the proceedings initiated for absence of the State E-way bill during the period 01.02.2018 to 31.03.2018 were sustainable, and whether the amount deposited pursuant to the impugned order was liable to be refunded.

Analysis: The goods were intercepted with tax invoice, Central E-way bill and builty, and the only alleged defect was non-availability of the State E-way bill under the Uttar Pradesh GST regime. The issue was treated as covered by earlier binding decisions holding that, for the relevant period, the requirement of the E-way bill under the Uttar Pradesh GST Act read with the rules framed thereunder was not enforceable. On that basis, the seizure and consequential proceedings were held to have been initiated without jurisdiction and could not survive.

Conclusion: The impugned orders were quashed and the amount deposited by the petitioner was directed to be refunded.

---