Case Law Details
Hindon Machinery Tools Vs State of U.P & Ors. (Allahabad High Court)
Incorrectly mentioning the number of tax invoices as tax invoice number on E-way Bill- Prima facie, there seems no discrepancy in E-way Bill attracting seizure of goods. Goods directed to be released without insisting for a deposit of any amount and furnishing security as GST already paid on goods.
FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH COURT ORDER /JUDGEMENT
Heard Sri Suyash Agrawal and Sri C.B. Tripathi, learned counsel for the respondents.
The goods of the petitioner have been seized in transit on 5.11.2018 on the ground that on the E- Way Bill the number of tax invoice was incorrectly mentioned.
The submission Sri Suyash Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioner is that the E- Way Bill only required mentioning of the document details. The petitioner has clearly mentioned that the goods are covered by nine tax invoices dated 2.11.2018. The E-Way Bill does not contain any tax invoice number and the authorities have wrongly taken the number of tax invoices to be the tax invoice number.
We are prima facie satisfied that there is no discrepancy in any document accompanying the goods which may amount to contravening the provisions of the act to permit the seizure of the goods.
Sri C.B. Tripathi is directed to file counter affidavit within three weeks. One week thereafter is allowed to the petitioner for filing rejoinder affidavit.
List for admission/ final disposal on the expiry of the above period.
In the meantime the seized goods of the petitioner shall be released forthwith without insisting for deposit of any amount and furnishing the security as GST has already been paid on the goods as per the accompanying invoices.
