TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
BELATED GENERATION OF E-WAY BILL
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ELATED GENERATION OF E-WAY BILL<br>By: - DR.MARIAPPAN GOVINDARAJAN<br>Goods and Services Tax - GST<br>Dated:- 25-9-2024<br><br>In M/S JHANSI ENTERPRISES, NANDANPURA, JHANSI VERSUS STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS - 2024 (3) TMI 219 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT the petitioner is a dealer registered under the GST Act. The petitioner sold a consignment of TMT Bars to Sahai & Sons on 10.03.2019 vide Tax Invoice No.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 167. The said consignment was transported through a vehicle. The said vehicle was intercepted by the GST Authorities on the same day. They issued an order to the driver for the physical verification of the conveyance at 03.59 pm on the ground that there is no proper document such as E-way bill, tax invoice, bill of supply, challan or bill of entry related to the goods in transit. The petitioner,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... after the interception produced the E-Way Bill, tax invoice etc., to the Authorities. The Authority did not accept the E-Way bill submitted by the petitioner on the ground that the said E-Way Bill was produced only after interception of the vehicle and further more the said E-Way Bill was generated after 4 hours from the commencement of the transportation of goods. A show cause notice was issue....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d to the petitioner under Section 129 (3) of the Act alleging that the movement of the goods was in contravention to the provisions of the Act. The petitioner filed reply to the show cause notice and also appeared before the Authorities on the hearing date fixed. The petitioner, in the reply to the show cause notice, contended that due non availability of computer operator the E-Way bill could not....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... be generated at proper time. The same was generated at 02.45 pm on 10.03.2019. The petitioner further contended that the invoice could not be produced since the same was handed over to the receiver of the goods. The Authority was not satisfied with the reply of the petitioner. The Authority passed orders confirming the demand also imposed penalty vide its order dated 14.03.2019. The petitioner p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aid the tax and penalty - Rs.3,97,224/-. On payment the goods were released to the petitioner. The petitioner filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) against the order of lower authority. The Appellate Authority dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner on 30.08.2019. Therefore, the petitioner filed the present writ petition before the High Court. The petitioner submitted the followin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g before the High Court- * The vehicle was parked at the godown for unloading at the time of interception by the Authorities. * The computer operator did not arrive earlier. * In the meantime, the dispatch clerk dispatched the goods on belief the E-Way bill would be generated soon. * The computer operator, after his arrival, generated the E-Way Bill. * The E-way Bill was generated well b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....efore interception of the vehicle. * There is no intention on the part of the petitioner to evade tax. * Since the vehicle was not in transit, the provisions of Section 129(3) of the Act would not apply to their case. * All the documents were submitted to the Authorities before passing the seizure order. * It is settled law the if E-Way Bill is downloaded before seizure and tax is also ch....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....arged, then penalty and seizure order is not justifiable. The petitioner, therefore, prayed the High Court to quash the impugned order. The Department, in response to the contentions of the petitioner, submitted the following before the High Court- * Any person, who causes movement of the goods if the value of consignments exceeds Rs.50000/-, shall before the commencement of the journey genera....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....te E-Way Bill on the common portal along with the other information as may be required on the common portal. * The Assistant Commissioner intercepted the impugned vehicle at 01.11 pm. At that time no document such as E-Way bill, tax invoice etc., were not found with the person causing the movement of goods. Therefore, the alleged goods were transported without valid documents. * The petitioner....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... generated E-Way bill only at the time of interception of the vehicle. * In the event of goods are not accompanied by the invoice or the E-Way bill a presumption may be raised that there is an intention to evade tax. * The action taken by the Authority as well as Appellate Authority is legally justified since the goods were not accompanied by the E-Way Bill. The High Court considered the subm....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....issions of both the parties. The High Court is to consider as to whether there is any actual intention to evade tax by the petitioner. If there is no intention to evade tax then there will be no demand of tax or imposition of penalty. In the present case there was no invoice or E-Way Bill accompanying the goods when the conveyance is intercepted by the Authorities. This contravention cannot be tre....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ated as a common mistake. If the goods are not accompanied by the invoice and E-way bill, a presumption may be raised that there is an intention to evade tax. The petitioner, in this case, could not explain the absence of invoice and E-way bill with a proper and reasonable explanation. The petitioner could not able to rebut the presumption of evasion of tax. Furnishing of documents after intercept....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion of the vehicle will not be a valid ground to show that there was no intention to evade tax. The High Court did not agree with the petitioner that the vehicle was not in transit and parked for downloading the goods. The interception took place away from the godown. The High Court held that the petitioner has not complied with the provisions of law and the action taken by the authorities are p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....roper and in accordance with the provisions of claw. Therefore, there is no requirement to interfere with the decisions of the authorities. Therefore, the High Court dismissed the writ petition.<br> Scholarly articles for knowledge sharing by authors, experts, professionals ....