Advertisement
Advertisement
Skip to content
Follow Us on
Advertisement
TOP STORIES
Goods and Services Tax

HC Dismisses Writ Petition Over Car Transportation: E-way Bill vs. Invoice-cum-Bill of Supply

Case Law Details

TaxGuru Citation
2025 taxguru.in 1202
Case Name
Gurbux Singh Gupta Versus State of West Bengal & Ors. (Calcutta High Court)
Date of Judgement/Order
Only available for paid members
Advertisement

Gurbux Singh Gupta Versus State of West Bengal & Ors. (Calcutta High Court)

E-way bill relied by the petitioner for transportation of the car contrary to the Invoice–cum–Bill of Supply showing no tax paid: HC dismissed writ petition

In the matter abovementioned Hon’ble Calcutta HC have dismissed the writ petition filed against impugned order imposing penalty u/s 129 (3) of WBGST after considering that petitioner failed to provide documentary evidence in support of his claim.

Writ application was filed challenging the impugned order u/s 129 (3) of WBGST directing the owner of the goods to pay penalty of Rs.33,82,000/-.

Petitioner bought a car from Shifting Gear Assam who purchased it from the real owner. Total sale consideration was Rs. 26,75,000/- inclusive of all taxes. The car was transported by real owner for delivery to the petitioner at Haryana. The car was stopped by respondent and vehicle was detained u/s 129 (1). Notice was issued which was duly replied by the petitioner. After considering the reply impugned order was passed.

It was submitted by petitioner that invoice-cum-bill of supply was issued in favour of the petitioner wherein taxes @ 9% SGST and 9% CGST were deducted by real owner hence taxes were paid on the margin value of Rs. 41,114.28/-. Respondents misclassified the car as a new car valued at Rs. 33.82 lacs and calculated 28% IGST and 22% Cess and illegally imposed penalty of Rs. 33,82,000/-. Respondent filed affidavit in support wherein it was mentioned that driver of the conveyance transporting the instant vehicle was not carrying any tax invoice relating to the supply of the car at the time of interception which attracts contravention of the provision of Section 68(1) WBGST and CGST read with Rule 138A. The e-way bill produced at the time of interception, was generated by Delivery Relocation Services of Gurgaon in support of the movement of the car. As per e-way bill, the car is being transported from Assam to Haryana which is not correct and not valid as the petitioner admitted that the car is being supplied by Shifting Gears, Assam to the petitioner at Mumbai.

Paid content

Become a Basic or Premium Member, or log in if you are already a Basic or Premium member.

Advertisement

Join TaxGuru's Network for the latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.