Case Law Details
Ramji Jaiswal & Anr Vs State Tax officer (Calcutta High Court)
In an important ruling, the Calcutta High Court nullified the penalty charged for the transportation of goods with an expired E-way bill in the case of Ramji Jaiswal & Anr Vs State Tax Officer. The court noted that there was no intention to evade tax on part of the petitioners and reversed the previous orders by the adjudicating and appellate authorities under the West Bengal GST Act.
Analysis: The court took into consideration the delay between the expiry of the E-way bill and the interception of the vehicle, attributing it to a genuine vehicle breakdown. The court also acknowledged that the gap was less than a day and the petitioners had no intention of tax evasion.
Despite the respondent’s insistence on the availability of an alternative remedy, the court set aside the orders of the adjudicating and appellate authorities based on the evidence presented. The respondent was unable to provide concrete proof to establish the petitioners’ deliberate or willful intention to evade tax.
In the Ramji Jaiswal & Anr Vs State Tax Officer case, the Calcutta High Court demonstrated its commitment to substantial justice by dismissing the penalty for an expired E-way bill where there was no intent to evade tax. The judgment sets a precedent for handling technical contraventions in the realm of tax law and reassures businesses facing genuine logistical issues that penalties are intended for cases of willful evasion, not technical oversights or unforeseen circumstances.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF KOLKATA HIGH COURT
Heard learned advocates appearing for the parties.
By this writ petition, the petitioners have challenged the impugned order of the appellate authority under WBGST Act confirming the order of the adjudicating authority imposing the penalty for transporting the vehicle in question after expiry of the e-way bill which was expired on 2nd August, 2021 at 11.59 p.m. and the vehicle in question was intercepted at 6.45 p.m. on 3rd August, 2021 that there is a time gap between the expiry of the bill and interception of the vehicle in question is about 18 hrs., which is less than a day and writ petitioners submit that there was no intention of any evasion of tax on the part of the petitioners and there was a genuine problem of break down of the vehicle in question.
Learned advocate appearing for the petitioners in support of his contention relies on an order of this Court dated 1st March, 2022 in WPA No. 11085 of 2021 in the case of Ashok Kumar Sureka – Vs – Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, Durgapur Range and also a Division Bench decision of this Court dated 12th May, 2022 in MAT No. 470 of 2022.
Learned advocate appearing for the respondents could not make out any case against the petitioners that there was any deliberate or willful intention of the petitioners to avoid and evade the tax and he opposes this writ petition on the ground of availability of alternative remedy.
In view of the facts and circumstances of the case which appears from record and considering the aforesaid two orders of this Court, this writ petition being WPA 15469 of 2022 is disposed of by setting aside the aforesaid impugned order of the appellate authority and adjudicating authority and as a consequence, petitioners will be entitled to get the refund of the penalty in question subject to compliance of legal formalities.
With this observation this writ petition stands disposed of.
