Case Law Details
Jaspreet Kalra Vs. Union of India (High Court of Uttarakhand)
It is the contention of learned senior counsel that the vehicle of the petitioner has been seized by respondent no.3 thereby imposing a penalty of Rs.5,03,125/- equal to the IGST (the tax amount) on the technical ground that the validity of e-way bill had expired on 03.02.2019. It is the contention of learned Senior Counsel that the Company had generated a fresh e-way bill on 06.02.2019 which was valid upto 12.02.2019 in continuation of the previously generated e-way bill, which stood expired on 03.02.2019, still impugned order of imposing penalty as well as seizure of vehicle has been passed.
Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, as an interim measure, it is directed that the vehicle of the petitioner shall be released forthwith provided the petitioner furnishes a security before the authority concerned as per the provisions contained under clause (c) sub-section (1) of Section 129 of The Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. (Interim relief application no.1883 of 2019 is disposed of).
FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH COURT ORDER / JUDGMENT
Mr. V.B.S. Negi, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Ankush Negi, Advocate for the petitioner.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
