TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (10) TMI 985
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....having GSTIN No. 07AACCM3279J1Z8 as well as duly certified by ISO 9001:2015. The petitioner is a verified seller of supreme quality of metal seated zero leakage Ball Valves and purchaser of Ball Valve, Diaphragm Valves in bulk. In the normal course of business, the petitioner has made outward supply of Rotor Assembly Elmo and Complete Assy-CL 3001 to NTPC Ltd, Ramagundam Super Thermal Power Station, P.O. Jyotinagar, Distt. Pedapalli, Telangana vide Tax Invoice No. 0000781/19-20 dated 14.8.2019 and the said goods were being transported from New Delhi to Telangana via Agra, U.P. , where the same was intercepted by respondent no. 2 at Saiyan, Agra, U.P. on 16.8.2019 and after physical verification of the goods, it was found that part B of the e-way bill accompanying with the goods, was not filled on which notice was issued proposing to impose tax @ 18 % i.e. Rs. 14,63,063/- along with equal amount of penalty. Thereafter on deposit of impugned tax along with penalty, the goods in question were released and respondent no. 2 vide order dated 21.8.2019 passed the penalty order in Form GST MOV 09 under Section 20 of IGST read with Section 129 (3) of CGST Act observing that part B of e-way ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cause notice was issued to which no reply was submitted by the petitioner to explain the fact that under what circumstances, part -B of the eway bill was not filled. The amount was deposited and goods were got released on the next date, which shows that there was contravention of the provisions as contemplated under the Act. 9. He further argued that each case of detention, seizure as well as penalty has to be looked into independently on its own facts therefore the judgements relied upon by the counsel for the petitioner are of no help to him as the aforesaid judgements have also been given in the facts of respective case. 10. He further argued that the argument raised by the counsel for the petitioner that the Circular dated 14.9.2018 has binding over the provisions of Section 129 of the Act, is incorrect as after taking note of the difficulty faced by the registered dealer, the aforesaid circular has been issued, wherein it has been prescribed for not initiating the proceedings under Section 129 of the Act, which falls from under para 5 of clause a to f; but the facts of the present case are different as the petitioner has not given any reason whatsoever under what circumstanc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uch the petitioner's counsel cannot be permitted to argue the case without any pleading in the writ petition. 16. Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Bachhaj Nahar Vs.Nilima Mandal and another, (2008) 17 SCC 491 has held as under:- 9. The object and purpose of pleadings and issues is to ensure that the litigants come to trial with all issues clearly defined and to prevent cases being expanded or grounds being shifted during trial. Its object is also to ensure that each side is fully alive to the questions that are likely to be raised or considered so that they may have an opportunity of placing the relevant evidence appropriate to the issues before the court for its consideration. This Court has repeatedly held that the pleadings are meant to give to each side intimation of the case of the other so that it may be met, to enable courts to determine what is really at issue between the parties, and to prevent any deviation from the course which litigation on particular causes must take. 10. The object of issues is to identify from the pleadings the questions or points required to be decided by the courts so as to enable parties to let in evidence thereon. When the facts necessa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....88) 4 SCC 534 (para-13), Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under: "13. As has been already noticed, although the point as to profiteering by the State was pleaded in the writ petitions before the High Court as an abstract point of law, there was no reference to any material in support thereof nor was the point argued at the hearing of the writ petitions. Before us also, no particulars and no facts have been given in the special leave petitions or in the writ petitions or in any affidavit, but the point has been sought to be substantiated at the time of hearing by referring to certain facts stated in the said application by HSIDC. In our opinion, when a point which is ostensibly a point of law is required to be substantiated by facts, the party raising the point, if he is the writ petitioner, must plead and prove such facts by evidence which must appear from the writ petition and if he is the respondent, from the counter-affidavit. If the facts are not pleaded or the evidence in support of such facts is not annexed to the writ petition or to the counter-affidavit, as the case may be, the court will not entertain the point. In this context, it will not be out of place to point out ....