Rejection of Appeal is invalid if vehicle breaks down and new e-way bill prepared post interception

OFB Tech Private Limited Vs State of West Bengal (Calcutta High Court)

The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in M/s OFB Tech Private Limited v. State of West Bengal & Ors. [WPA 1271 of 2023 dated January 24, 2023] has set aside the order passed by the Appellate Authority and remanded back the matter to Appellate Authority to pass a fresh speaking order after giving petitioners an opportunity of being heard, as the assessee had duly prepared the e-way bill within 3 minutes of the interception of the vehicle.

Facts:

M/s OFB Tech Pvt. Ltd (“the Petitioner”) has challenged the Order dated September 12, 2022 (“the Impugned Order”) of the Appellate Authority under the provisions of the West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (“the WBGST Act”) wherein the order in original dated December 17,2021 was confirmed imposing penalty and tax under the WBGST Act.

The Petitioner was carrying the goods and was having a valid e-way bill of the vehicle.  The e-way bill was generated on December 07, 2021 and was valid till December 10, 2021. The aforementioned vehicle experienced a breakdown prior to the e-way bill’s expiration. Further, arrangement was made for another vehicle in which the same goods was shifted. The Petitioner generated a fresh e-way bill within three minutes after interception of the second vehicle.

Issue:

Whether the rejection of appeal by the Appellate Authority, after generation of a new e-way Bill due to breakdown of vehicle within three minutes of interception, is valid or not?

Held:

The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in WPA 1271 of 2023 held as under:

• Observed that, the Appellate Authority failed to properly take into account the petitioner’s argument regarding the breakdown of the first vehicle and the generation of a fresh e-way bill for the same goods within three minutes after the second vehicle was intercepted.
• Further observed that, the rejection and dismissal of the appeal on this ground is overly technical in this particular situation.
• Held that, the Impugned Order should be set aside and the matter should be brought back to the Appellate Authority to pass a fresh speaking order after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner or its authorised representative.

FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF CALCUTTA HIGH COURT

Heard learned Advocates appearing for the parties.

By this writ petition, petitioner has challenged the impugned order of the Appellate Authority under WBGST Act, dated 12t^h September, 2022, dismissing the appeal of the petitioner and confirming the order in original dated 17t^h December, 2021 imposing penalty and tax under relevant provision of the WBGST Act, on the ground that at the time of interception of the vehicle in question it was not having e-way bill which was intercepted on 9t^h December, 2021. The case of the petitioner is that petitioner was carrying the goods in question having valid e-way bill generated on 7th December, 2021 and was valid till 10^th December, 2021 and before the expiry of the e-way bill relating to the said vehicle in question, there was a break down of the same and it could not move and remained stationary and at the time when the break down took place, e-way bill was very much valid and had not expired. Thereafter, arrangement was made for another vehicle in which the very same goods in question was shifted. It is the case of the petitioner that at the time of interception of the second vehicle in question in which the same goods in question was shifted it was not having any e-way bill but immediately within three minutes after interception of the second vehicle in question new e-way bill was generated and explanation by the petitioner for generation of the new e-way bill in connection with the second vehicle in question is that it could not anticipate the registration number of the vehicle for which as per rule e-way bill has to be generated and immediately after loading of the very same goods in question it generated the fresh e-way bill relating to the said vehicle though it was done within three minutes after interception of the same.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as appears from record and submission of the parties and on perusal of the impugned order of the Appellate Authority, I am of the view that the case of the petitioner as made out in this with petition regarding the break down of the vehicle in question and generation of new e-way bill generated in respect of the same goods in question within three minutes after the interception of the vehicle in question by the respondents, has not been properly considered by the Appellate Authority for rejection and dismissal of the appeal on this ground is too much technical in this case as appears to this court from the facts and circumstances of the case.

Accordingly, the impugned order dated 12^th September, 2022 along with the rectification order dated 16^th November, 2022 are set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Appellate Authority concerned to pass a fresh speaking order in accordance with law after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner or its authorised representative and after taking into consideration the observation made in this order on the issue raised by the petitioner, within a period of 12 weeks from the date of communication of this order.

With this observation and direction, this writ petition being WPA 1271 of 2023 is disposed of.

*****

(Author can be reached at info@a2ztaxcorp.com)