2023 (3) TMI 58

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r in proceedings under Section 129(3) of the U.P. Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter called as "Act of 2017"). 3. The petitioner before this Court is a registered dealer and had sold 300 bags of Pan Masala valued at Rs.33,81,000/- to a dealer at Meghalaya. A tax invoice was generated on 08.04.2018 under the Integrated Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter called "IGST Act") charging 28% IGST and 60% Cess on the transaction. 4. According to petitioner, the goods were handed over to transporter M/s Bombay Kandla Transport Pvt. Ltd. for transporting the goods to Meghalaya through Truck No.NL01N/6504 and a E-Way bill was generated on 08.04.2018 itself. The transporter, on the same day, also issued a bility for transportin....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Due to the fact that the vehicle was used for transporting fruits and vegetable to West Bengal and thereafter rice to Darbhanga, it was made available to the petitioner on 17.04.2018 and the E-Way Bill was existing when the goods were to be transported. According to him, the finding returned by the Appellate Authority cannot be accepted that the E-Way Bill should have been cancelled once the goods were not dispatched on the same day. There is no compulsion to cancel E-Way Bill in view of Rule 139(9). As the vehicle was made available by the transporter on 17.04.2008, the goods were loaded and dispatched on the intervening night 17/18.04.2018. According to him, it is not a case where goods were detained by the Mobile Squad without any docu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....1N/6504. He further invited the attention of the Court to para 7 of the counter affidavit where description of vehicle has been given from 08.04.2018 to 18.04.2018 while it passed through three toll plazas viz. Anantram Toll Plaza, Badori Toll Plaza, Fatehpur and Kokhraj Toll Plaza, Allahabad. He then contended that the purchasing dealer has not come forward nor any explanation was furnished after the notice was issued when the goods were intercepted and the vehicle was detained. 9. I have heard the respective counsel for the parties and perused the material on record. 10. It is a case where taxing authorities, after intercepting the goods of the petitioner on 18.04.2018, had detained the same and issued notice to both the selling and....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... been verified in transit in accordance with Rule 138-B. The dealer in the present case had waited for 10 long days and did not cancel the E-Way Bill generated by him on common portal, though, the vehicle was not provided by the transporter. 12. From the findings recorded by the taxing authorities it is clearly evident that vehicle no.NL01N/6504 was not only used by Bombay Kandla Transport (P) Ltd. through which goods were sent by the petitioner-dealer, but also by Bombay Kolkata Logistics for sending fruits and vegetable to Panchkula and by Delhi Hemkunt Logistics for sending rice to Darbhanga (Bihar). Once, the vehicle was not available on 08.04.2018 and was used for transporting fruits and vegetable and its journey commenced on 07.04.....