TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (9) TMI 1650
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e impugned orders, neither the Jurisdictional Officer nor the Appellate Authority considered the facts that the generation of the 2nd E-way Bill which was the result of the breakdown of the vehicle on 19.08.2024 in the geographical area of district Orai, Uttar Pradesh, and the receipt of such information by the transporter from the driver only on 22.08.2024. The impugned orders have also been passed without noticing that the appellant had no intention to evade the tax. The alleged so-called lapse may only be treated as technical and procedural, which did not result in any loss of revenue to the Government. The appellant had been deprived of sufficient opportunity of hearing, and such act of the authorities below violates the principle of natural justice. 2. Chartered Accountant, Ms. Divya Gwal appeared on behalf of the appellant, and Shri Manav Kumar Vikas, Deputy Commissioner alongwith Shri Yogendra Kumar, Assistant Commissioner, appeared as authorised representatives of the respondent-State before the Bench. 3. The learned Chartered Accountant, Ms. Divya Gwal, and learned representatives of the State, Shri Manav Kumar Vikas along with Shri Devendra Kumar argued their respec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....alid documents with intention to evade the tax and also with mala fide intention at the time of its interception. 8. The penalty as imposed upon the appellant under Section 129 of the GST Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) requires scrutiny of the facts regarding transportation of goods in a mala fide manner with intention to evade the tax by appellant. 9. The provision of Section 129 of the Act is attracted whenever there is transportation of goods or storage of goods while in transit, in contravention of the provisions of the Act or Rules made thereunder dealing with the manner of its transportation or storage. 10. Rule 138 of CGST/UPGST requires generation of an E-way Bill electronically before the movement of goods begins if the consignment value exceeds Rs. 50000/. 11. Rule 138(10) of CGST/UPGST provides for extension from generation of an E-way Bill within 8 hours after its expiry. Nowhere has it been provided to generate a fresh E-way Bill on the basis of the same invoice. 12. In the present case, the E-way Bill originally generated has not been extended but ignoring such provision the second E-way Bill has been generated after the lapse of 3 days counti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....from Kachora Ghat, Etawah, which shows that the vehicle concerned had been driven more than 500 km distance within about 24 hours. Rule 138 requires covering the minimum distance of 200 km within 24 hours. From Manjusar (Gujrat) via Ahmedabad, the vehicle loaded with paints and allied products had to cover 1727 km distance by or before 19.08.2024 as mentioned in the E-way Bill but according to the appellant it could cover only about 950 km distance which may be pointed out at Orai (Uttar Pradesh) on the date of expiry of E-way Bill, i.e., 19.08.2024. 18. Covering of about 500 km distance from Kachora Ghat, Etawah, to Ballia within a short time of about 24 hours by truck/vehicle No. UP 84 AT 8847 clearly establishes that 4 days' time was sufficient to carry the goods from Manjusar via Ahmedabad to Bihta, Bihar, but the same could not be done within more than 09 days commencing from 10.08.2024 till 19.08.2024. 19. As per the requirement of Rule 138, the original E-way Bill did not find the shape of renewal within the prescribed 8 hours after its expiry. The appellant generated the second E-way Bill without authority of law after a lapse of 03 days on 22.08.2024 to transport the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ire body of material on its merits. It is also a settled principle of law that an adverse inference be drawn for withholding the best evidence. 24. The nature of proceedings under section 129 is civil. In Gulabchand v. Kudilal, AIR 1966 SC 1734, (5 Judges Bench), Hon'ble Apex Court held that the definition of 'proved' in section 3 of Indian Evidence Act applies the same standard of proof in civil cases and it makes no difference between cases in which charges of fraudulent or criminal characters are made and cases in which such charges are not made. Hon'ble Court further observed that it is wrong to insist that such charges must be proved clearly and beyond reasonable doubt. Civil cases are to be decided on the basis of preponderance of probabilities. 25. In Satish Chandra vs. Satish Kaul, AIR 2023 PC 73; S.P. Chengalvaraya Naidu vs. Jagannath, AIR 1994 SC 853 and a few other cases, it has been observed that fraud remains secret which is interwoven in airtight compartment. It is further observed that fraud is an act of deliberate deception with the design of securing something by taking unfair advantage of another. It is a deception in order to gain by another's loss. It is a....