Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Assistant Commissioner (ST) & Ors. Vs Satyam Shivam Papers Pvt. Limited (Supreme Court of India)
Appeal Number : Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 21132/2021
Date of Judgement/Order : 12/01/2022
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Assistant Commissioner (ST) & Ors. Vs Satyam Shivam Papers Pvt. Limited (Supreme Court of India)

No tax evasion can be presumed on mere non-extension of validity of e-way bill due to traffic blockage and agitation

The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Assistant Commissioner ST & Ors. v. Satyam Shivam Papers Pvt. Ltd. [Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 21132/2021 dated January 12, 2022] affirmed the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Telangana High Court and held that, tax evasion cannot be presumed on mere non-extension of validity of e-way bill by the assessee due to traffic blockage and agitation, for which the Revenue Authority is responsible for not providing smooth passage of traffic. Further, imposed a sum of INR 69,000/- on the Revenue Department towards the cost payable to the assessee, and to be recovered, directly from the persons responsible.

Facts:

This petition has been filed by the Revenue Department (“the Petitioner”), being aggrieved of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Telangana High Court in Satyam Shivam Papers Pvt. Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner ST & Ors. [Writ Petition No. 9688 of 2020 dated June 2, 2021wherein, the Court set aside the order passed by the Petitioner in Form GST MOV-09, imposing tax and penalty on Satyam Shivam Papers Pvt. Ltd. (“the Respondent”) due to the expiry of the e-way bill and deprecated the Petitioner for blatant abuse of power in detaining goods by treating validity of the expiry on the e-way bill as amounting to evasion of tax compelling the Petitioner to pay INR 69,000/- by such conduct. It was held that, no presumption can be drawn that there was an intention to evade tax on account of non-extension of the validity of the e-way bill by the Respondent. Further, directed the Petitioner to refund the amount collected from the Petitioner with interest @6% p.a. and imposed fine of INR 10,000/- payable to the Respondent.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

One Comment

  1. Sujit Kumar Das says:

    Sir, We are very sorry for the very concept of E-way bill by the law makers. The authority is not also practical and the India is becoming the heaven of advocates and will be. The highest court is to handle such practical mini matter and… our country will do progress!!!! thanks too the ministry.. Sir, in today’s scenario can you say the purpose, the way-bill is serving and adding the value to the nation? Only we are to complicate the business transaction.. nothing more. We can not leave the old thought process though we are wanting to be forward to digitization… It’s my personal views.. so many may agree to it.. Thanks & Regards

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031