Ram Enterprises Vs State of Up And 2 Others (Allahabad High Court)
The Allahabad High Court examined a writ petition challenging a penalty order dated November 6, 2024 passed under Section 129(1)(b) of the CGST Act read with the IGST Act. The petitioner contended that the authorities imposed penalty despite the presence of valid invoice and e-way bill accompanying the consignment of areca nuts. It was noted that the authorities did not dispute the genuineness of the invoice, e-way bill, or the transaction involving purchase and supply of goods.
The petitioner relied on Circular No. 76/50/2018-GST, which clarifies that where goods are accompanied by valid documents, the consignor or consignee shall be deemed the owner. Reference was also made to a Division Bench judgment holding that the department is bound by the said circular and must treat the consignor as owner if named in the invoice.
The Court held that the penalty order under Section 129(1)(b) was illegal and unjustified. It directed the authorities to proceed under Section 129(1)(a) and release the goods and vehicle upon payment of penalty in accordance with law. The writ petition was accordingly disposed of.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
1. Heard counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.
