Prahlad Rai Vijay Kumar Vs State of U.P. And 2 Others (Allahabad High Court)
In the case of Prahlad Rai Vijay Kumar vs. State of U.P. (WRIT TAX No. 587 of 2022), the Allahabad High Court held that, in the absence of an intention to evade tax, the penalty order is liable to be quashed.
Facts of the Case
The petitioner, a taxable person, issued a tax invoice and an e-way bill for the supply made. Both documents were accompanying the vehicle carrying the goods. The vehicle was intercepted for verification, and the goods were found to be in order and matched the invoices and e-way bill. However, the e-way bill had expired nine hours and thirty minutes prior to the interception. The delay in transportation was due to the vehicle breaking down. This explanation was not considered by the authorities, and a penalty under Section 129(3) of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’), was imposed.
Court’s Findings and Conclusion
The court noted that in the event of an e-way bill expiring, there is a provision in the portal that allows the transporter, consignor, or consignee to seek an extension. Undisputedly, such an extension was not carried out by the petitioner.
