Nirmal Kumar Mahaveer Kumar Vs Commissioner of Central Goods and Services Tax (Delhi High Court)
No penalty shall be imposed on any person without giving him the opportunity of being heard
The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Nirmal Kumar Mahaveer Kumar v. Commissioner of Central Goods and Services Tax and Another [W.P. (C) 8585/2022 dated August 23, 2022] directed that the assessee needs to be given another chance to establish, as to why the subject goods did not reach their designated designation before the expiry of the e-way bill. Remanded back the matter to the assessing authority, to take a fresh decision in the matter, after giving the assessee due opportunity to produce relevant material/evidence to establish its case, that the delay in transporting the goods to their destination was on account of genuine reasons.
Facts:
Nirmal Kumar Mahaveer Kumar (“the Petitioner”) transported goods from Guwahati to Delhi. The e-way bill was prepared for those goods which was valid till September 28, 2020. The goods reached its destination on September 29, 2020, by which time the e-way bill got expired.
Accordingly, show-cause notice dated September 30, 2020 (“the SCN”) was issued by the assessing authority (“the Respondent”) to the Petitioner under Section 129(3) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (“the CGST Act”) the reason given, “goods not covered by valid documents”. The Petitioner paid the amount demanded towards tax and penalty, as he was keen that the goods reached the designated destination at the earliest and did not avail of the opportunity of being heard.
Subsequently, the Respondent passed an Order dated December 31, 2021 (“the Impugned Order”) and imposed tax along with the penalty equal to 100% of tax payable. Being aggrieved by the Impugned order the Petitioner filed the writ petition.
Issue:
Whether or not the Petitioner is liable to pay tax along with the penalty equal to 100% of tax?
Held:
The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in W.P. No (C) 8585 of 2022 dated April 23, 2022 held as under:
