AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (10) TMI 891
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... EWB-04 dated 21.02.2019 (hereinafter referred to as "the impugned order") passed by Joint Commissioner, Central Goods & Service Tax Division-F, Sector-10, Vidhyadhar Nagar, Jaipur (hereinafter also referred to as "the adjudicating authority"). Brief facts of the case:- 2.1 The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is having GSTIN No.08AAFCA8793G1Z9 engaged in whole sale business of home needs, groceries, foods and beverage, etc., The principal place of business of the Company is in the state of Rajasthan, situated at Plot No.2, Jagdish Marg, Bani Park, Jaipur. The Dealer has recently opened a new Branch at Faujadar Complex 2, Kachhari Road Ward No.20, Bayana, Bharatpur (Rajasthan). To set up the infrastructure at that branc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g the demand of Tax amounting to Rs. 1,01,377/-(Rs. 6723/-CGST+ Rs. 6723/- SGST + Rs. 87,931/-IGST) imposed a penalty equal to 100% Tax. The impugned goods were released by issuing Release Order in the FORM GST MOV 05 dated 21.02.2019 after depositing of duty and penalty amount. 3. Being aggrieved with the impugned order, the appellant has filed the appeal on various grounds which are summarized as under: -that the assessing officer has erred by treating the transfer of Fixed Assets as stock transfer and imposing the tax and penalty on account of non-availability of E-way Bill. The transfer was merely the shifting of fixed assets from one branch to another for which there is no requirement of E-way Bill. -that under the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... not attract any GST liability. Further, the documents seized by the adjudicating authority was available with the transporter at the time of detention was 'Delivery Challan', not a GST invoice to sell goods with or without GST. Here, in our case, as it was not a sale, so, the dealer has not raised any GST invoice. We are enclosing herewith copy of GSTR-1 for the month of Feb-2019 from which it can be verified that all the sale made was against GST invoice series from 218003881 to RJ0920178114. Whereas our delivery challan has a series No.2120 which is different from the above series. that the adjudicating authority has applied Section 129 (1) and imposed a penalty equal to the amount of 100% of tax payable on such goods. But i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ne through' the case records and detail submissions made by the appellant in the appeal memorandum as well as at the time of personal hearing. 6. On perusal of the facts on record, I find that the adjudicating authority has imposed a Tax Rs. 1,01,377/-(Rs. 6723/-CGST+ Rs. 6723/- SGST + Rs. 87,931/-IGST) and imposed a penalty equal to 100% Tax under Section 129 (3) of the CGST Act, 2017 on the ground that on 18.02.2019 at the time of inspection of the movement of goods the driver/person-in-charge of the goods were carrying the goods without E-way Bill. The appellant in their defence has stated that he is engaged in whole sale business of home needs, groceries, foods and beverage, etc., The Principe place of business of the Company is ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the transfer of a going concern even if the act of transfer does not constitute an activity carried out in the course of regular business or for furtherance of business, the activity may still qualify to be termed as a supply. If transfer of going concern is considered as a part of business then it is a supply. To determine this, Section 7 (1A) provides that where certain activities or transactions constitute a supply in accordance with the provisions of sub section (1), they shall be treated either as supply of goods or supply of services as referred to in Schedule-II. In schedule II, the entry at Serial Number 4 refer to 'transfer of business assets'. Transfer of business assets is considered as supply of goods. Wherea....