Auto Industries Vs State of Up And 2 Others (Allahabad High Court)
The Allahabad High Court heard a writ petition challenging orders dated 20th February 2024 and 24th June 2024 passed by the respondents under the GST Act. The petitioner, a proprietorship firm registered under GST with GSTIN 09AAUFA7612G1Z6, engaged in manufacturing and selling railway machinery parts, contested the seizure of goods on 19th February 2024. The goods were intercepted solely on the ground that Part B of the e-way bill accompanying the consignment was not updated. Subsequently, a penalty order under Section 129(3) of the GST Act was imposed, which the petitioner challenged in appeal, dismissed by the impugned order dated 24th June 2024.
The petitioner submitted that all necessary documents were produced at the time of interception and the goods matched the tax invoice. The non-filing of Part B of the e-way bill was due to a technical glitch, and there was no intention to evade tax. He argued that the authorities did not record any finding regarding intent to evade tax. The petitioner relied on precedents, including M/s Tata Hitachi Construction Machinery Company Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of U.P., M/s Citykart Retail Pvt. Ltd. vs. CCT & Another, and M/s Roli Enterprises vs. State of U.P., which held that non-filing of e-way bill due to technical reasons does not attract penalty under Section 129(3) of the GST Act.
