Om Enterprises Vs Additional Commissioner (Allahabad High Court)
The petitioner, a trader of TMT iron bars, challenged two orders dated 03.12.2022 and 21.12.2021 relating to the detention of goods and imposition of penalty under Section 129(3) of the GST Act. The petitioner argued that although the tax invoice was generated on 21.12.2021, the e-way bill could not be generated at that time due to a technical glitch. The e-way bill was subsequently generated at 10.59 a.m. the same day. The goods were intercepted at 11.29 a.m., and during inspection, the e-way bill was not available. A show cause notice was issued, and the petitioner replied by submitting the e-way bill, but the authorities rejected the explanation, seized the goods, and imposed a penalty. The appellate authority upheld the penalty despite noting that the e-way bill had been generated before the time of interception.
The petitioner relied on a previous judgment, OSR Creation, where it was held that if an e-way bill was produced before issuance of a seizure order and there was no indication of intent to evade tax, penalty under Section 129 was unjustified. The State argued that the petitioner violated statutory requirements because the goods were not accompanied by the mandatory documents at the time of interception. The State relied on Aysha Builders & Suppliers, where the e-way bill was generated only after the detention order, but the petitioner argued that the facts of that case differed materially.
