TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (3) TMI 722
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dated 4-12-2018 passed by the Asst. Commissioner State Taxes & Excise (ACST & Officer, Paonta Sahib Circle-II, District Sirmour vide which an additional demand of Rs. 57,708/- was created against the appellant u/s. 129(1) of HPGST & CGST Act, 2017. 3. Brief facts of the case : (i) The appellant-dealer is registered under HPGST Act, 2017 holding GSTIN 02ACZPB9796R2ZC in the name of Ms. Mahalakshmi Packagers Manufacture Corrugated Box, Village Beherwala, Paonta Sahib H.P. The appellant dealer is importing Paper Board as raw material for manufacturing of Corrugated Boxes. (ii) The appellant-dealer has been imposed CGST and SGST as well as penalty under the HPGST, 2017. (iii) The respondent ACST & E Circle, Paonta Sahib has intercepted the vehicle for inspection and found silly clerical mistake in the E-way Bill and imposed huge tax and penalty for amounting to Rs. 57,708/- under the aforesaid Act for such import. 4. Aggrieved by the order of ACST & E, Paonta Circle-II the Appellant has filed the present appeal on following Grounds : Ground of appeals : (i) The order of the respondent is unjust, unlawful and sketchy. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Unnumbered" in heading Grounds of Appeal at Para Sr. No. 2 himself admitted and mentioned that Clerical mistake was committed at the time of making the tax invoice and same was repeated in the E-way Bill which is must enough to prove the mala fide intention of appellant. (iii) Para 3 is regarding Section 81 of IPC and principal of mens rea and later correlated with the Section 10(10) of the CST Act, 1956. (iv) Section 81 of IPC and mens rea are legal points and not needed to be replied. But legal reply to Section cited in appeal is as under :- Section 10A(1) of the CST Act is dealing with the 10(1)[10(a)] Imposition of penalty in lieu of prosecution. - [(1)] If any person purchasing goods is guilty of an offence under clause (b) or clause (c) or clause (d) of section 10, the authority who granted to him or, as the case may be, is Competent to grant to him a certificate of registration under this Act may, after giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard, by order in writing, impose upon him by way of penalty a sum not exceeding one and a half times [the tax which would have been levied under sub-section (2) of secti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Bill. Same fact was admitted by the appellant in para 1 of appeal. (ii) It may kindly be noted that E-way Bill was issued on 2-12-2018 and validity of E-way Bill is up to 6-12-2018, distance between Rohini Delhi and destination of Goods Behrewala Paonta Sahib, is not more than 260 Kms. although distance shown in E-way Bill is 400 Kms. Distance was shown just double so that validity of E-way Bill can be increased so that after the unloading of vehicle said E-way Bill can be increased so that after the unloading of vehicle said E-way Bill can be removed from the system of E-way Bill or can be modified. It is pertinent to mention that E-way Bill can be modified within the validity period. It is provided in the E-way Bill system that validity period of E-way Bill is determined by the distance shown in E-way Bill. (iii) It may also be taken into consideration that Vehicle No. HP17B4290 is also in the name of Shri Anil Kumar and same person is acting owner Ms. Mahalakshmi Packagers Behrewala. So it would be easy game for tax evasion if said consignment was not detected in time. (iv) Further at para 4 of grounds of appeal is legal a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... this there is no dispute on quantity/quality of goods in question and validity of E-way Bill. The consignment was intercepted on dated 4th Dec., 2018 and thereby a tax/ penalty has been imposed under Section 129(3) of HPGST/CGST Act, 2017 for contravention of HPGST Rule, 138. 8. The petitioner has placed reliance on the CBIC Circular No. 64/38/2018-GST, dated 14th Sep., 2018 and State Government vide Circular No. 12-25/2018-19-EXN-GST-(575)-6009-6026, dated 13-3-2019 effective w.e.f. 14-9-2018, in para 5 provides that in case a consignment of goods is accompanied with an invoice or any other specified document and also an E-way Bill, proceedings under Section 129 of the CGST Act may not be initiated inter alia in the following situations : (a) Spelling mistakes in the name of the consigner or the consignee but the GSTIN, wherever applicable, is correct; (b) Error in the pin code but the address of the consigner and the consignee mentioned is correct, subject to the condition that the error in pin code should not have the effect of increasing the validity period of the E-way Bill; (c) Error in the address of the consignee to the....