Order Date: 6 September 2022

Facts-

• The Petitioner, Citykart Retail Pvt. Ltd.  is a company engaged in the business of Trading of Ready-made garments etc. It is stated that on 17.04.2018, the commissioner commercial tax inspected the vehicle transporting the goods of the petitioner at Auraiya, U.P. The said goods were being transported from Gurgaon, Haryana to Rae Bareli, U.P. and at the time of inspection, the department found that the e-way bill was incomplete as Part- B of the e-way bill was not available.
• A show cause notice issued to the petitioner. The petitioner gave a reply to the said show cause notice explaining that the vehicle through which the goods were being transported was, however, on account of some technical error, the vehicle number could not be registered, as such, the vehicle number was not reflected in Part-B of the e-way bill which led to the seizure of the goods.
• The present petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the demand/penalty order dated 18.04.2018 as well as the appellate order passed by the respondents. It is also prayed that the amount of penalty deposited by the petitioner may be directed to be refunded.

Issue-

• Whether the impugned order imposing penalty as well as demanding tax petition is sustainable?

Order-

• The Single Bench of Hon’ble High Court observed that it is clear that the only allegation leveled against the petitioner leading to seizure of the goods was that Part-B of the e-way bill was not filled up. There is no allegation that the goods being transported were being transported without payment of tax. The explanation offered by the petitioner for not filling the Part-B of e-way bill, is clearly supported by the Circulars issued by the Ministry of Finance wherein the problem arising in filling the part-B of e-way bill was noticed and advisories were issued.
• In the present case, prima-facie no intent to evade the duty can be ascertained, only on the allegation that Part-B of the e-way bill was not filled, more so, in view of the fact that the vehicle in which the goods were being transported on a Delhi number, the said issue being decided in the judgment dated 13.04.2018 in the case of VSL Alloys India Pvt. Ltd. covers the issue raised in the present case also, as such, the impugned order dated 18.04.2018 and the appellate order dated 14.05.2019 are set aside.
• The Court allowed the writ petition is with direction to the respondents to refund the amount collected and paid by the petitioner.