The Allahabad High Court upheld a penalty against M/s Birds RO System Pvt. Ltd. for transporting goods without an e-way bill, emphasizing that an e-way bill must be generated before the commencement of goods movement. The case involved the petitioner, who supplied RO/water purifier systems and issued invoices in December 2021 for goods exceeding ₹50,000, necessitating an e-way bill. Despite instructions to the transporter not to dispatch the goods before generating the e-way bill, the transporter moved the goods without it. Upon interception, only invoices were available, and the petitioner claimed a technical glitch prevented timely e-way bill generation, which was only completed after the detention of goods.
The court addressed whether a penalty under Section 129 is justified when goods are transported without an e-way bill due to alleged transporter mistakes or technical issues. It concluded that the absence of an e-way bill at the time of interception constitutes a violation, and generating it afterward does not rectify this breach. The decision relied on previous Division Bench rulings in similar cases, such as Aysha Builders & Suppliers and Mohini Traders, which supported penalties in such circumstances.
Read More: GST – West Bengal AAR: Without a valid proof to establish applicant's identify, application of advance ruling is rejected [Order attached]
Without evidence of a portal error or an attempt to comply with regulations, the court confirmed the penalty and dismissed the writ petition. This judgment reinforces the necessity for strict adherence to e-way bill requirements under the GST framework, highlighting the importance of compliance before transporting goods.
Parties: M/s Birds RO System Pvt. Ltd. V. State of U.P. & Ors.
Order Date: 17 November 2025
Facts –
- Petitioner, engaged in supply of RO/water purifier systems, issued invoices to customers on 15 and 16 December 2021. Goods exceeded ₹50,000; therefore e-way bills were mandatory.
- Petitioner instructed transporter not to dispatch until e-way bill generation. Transporter nevertheless loaded and moved goods without e-way bill.
- Goods intercepted; only invoices were present, no e-way bill. Petitioner claimed technical glitch; e-way bill generated only after detention. Penalty imposed under Section 129(3); appeal dismissed.
Issue –
- Whether penalty under Section 129 is justified when goods are transported without an e-way bill, even if the dealer alleges mistake by transporter or technical glitch?
Order –
- The High Court held that e-way bill must exist before commencement of movement.
- E-way bill generated after interception does not cure the violation.
- Relied on binding Division Bench decisions like Aysha Builders & Suppliers (2025), Mohini Traders (2025), both upholding penalty where e-way bill is absent at interception.
- No evidence of portal error or attempt at compliance. Penalty and orders confirmed.
- Writ petition dismissed.
