This is with reference to the judgement of Ahmedabad High Court in case of M/s NEUVERA WELLNESS VENTURES PVT LTD dated 18-04-2019 whereby the court had given judgment basis the findings in the order passed without any reason assigned to it while issuing order. Hence, the order issued was not a speaking order and the matter needs to be re-considered again by the authorities  (respondent) and after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard need to pass an order.

Facts of the case

  • The petitioner was engaged in import and sale of dietary food products such as protein powder of different flavours;
  • The petitioner while importing such goods had stored such goods in custom bonded warehouse ;
  • The goods were cleared from custom warehouse by filing ex-bond bill of entry and on payment of applicable taxes (BCD+IGST) to petitioner own warehouse with E-Way (Part B not completed);
  • Goods were detained on the way by the authorities for verification at Kamrej Toll ;
  • The petitioner had given written submission whereby the fact that the tax had already been paid on such transaction and the transaction (custom warehouse to own warehouse) is not a supply as per GST. Hence, GST is not applicable on such transaction;
  • The authorities order  MOV-09 and 129(3) and directed  to pay tax and penalty by the petitioner otherwise proceedings u/s 130 would be initiated
  • Aggrieved by the above order, the writ has been filed preferred

Ruling

  • The authorities while issuing order (MOV-09) had not considered the written submission made by the petitioner dated 01-04-2019;
  • The order issued is without any reasons being given of detention of such goods;
  • The High court held that “reason” is the heart and soul of any order issued. Without which, it is difficult to how the authority came to a particular conclusion;
  • The court remanded back the matter and issued direction for initiating fresh proceeding and pass a speaking order;
  • The court allowed the petition partially in favour of the petitioner and directed petitioner to furnish “Bond security to the extent of tax and penalty” till that time

Hence, it is very crucial to check the particulars (Part A & B) of “E-Way bill” are correct and complete in order to avoid any litigations as the authorities under GST are not considering any explanations and issuing adverse orders. Though the same can be appealed within 60 days of communication of such order.

Hope the above is informative. Please post your reviews and comments.

Author Bio

Qualification: CA in Job / Business
Company: N/A
Location: Kota, Rajasthan, IN
Member Since: 22 Jul 2017 | Total Posts: 9
I am a Chartered Accountant having experience in Tax advisory services (Direct/Indirect) for a 5 years. Currently I am involved in GST advisory services and compliance services. View Full Profile

My Published Posts

More Under Goods and Services Tax

One Comment

  1. R.S. TIWARI says:

    Sir, the main objective of Section 68 readwith rule 138 to generate Eway bill is to check tax evasion. Since in this case the Igst has been paid at the destination point and there is no further occasion to evasion of tax. In my opinion, the generation of e-way is not mandatory, the receipt IGST paid is more stronger evidence than the E-way. Sir,if the mandte of sustantilal law is satisfied, the procedural law should not be applicable.

Leave a Comment

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

Search Posts by Date

October 2020
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031