Case Law Details
Akhilesh Traders Vs State of U.P. And 3 Others (Allahabad High Court)
Introduction: The recent judgment by the Allahabad High Court in the case of Akhilesh Traders vs. State of U.P. delves into the complexities of GST penalties. The petitioner contested penalties imposed under Section 129(3) of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Act, 2017. This article provides a detailed analysis of the judgment, emphasizing the court’s stance on the production timing of GST invoices and E-Way bills concerning penalty imposition.
Detailed Analysis: The petitioner, Akhilesh Traders, challenged the penalty imposed by the Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Tax, under Section 129(3) of the Act. The dispute arose from the interception of goods without accompanying E-Way bills, invoices, or bills. Subsequently, these documents were produced by the assessee.
Legal arguments hinged on whether producing documents after interception and before detention absolves the assessee of penalties. The petitioner referenced earlier judgments, asserting that penalties are not leviable when documents are presented post-interception. The Department, on the other hand, contended that, post-April 2018, the E-Way Bill is mandatory, and its absence, along with invoices, constitutes a significant violation.
The Court considered precedents but underscored the undeniable contravention of rules in this case—neither invoices nor E-Way Bills accompanied the goods during interception. The absence of these essential documents was not deemed a mere technicality, shifting the burden of proof to the assessee to establish the lack of mens rea for tax evasion.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
