GST Portal, e-Invoice Login & ITC Updates

Share:-

Facts –

The petitioner, M/s SWAPAN CHANDRA DE, a civil contractor, purchased an automatic self-loading concrete machine from Podder and Podder Industries Pvt. Limited, Silchar, Assam for the purpose of executing a Government Megal project.
The seller obtained all necessary documents and e-way bill on 15.03.2022 and transported the machine through a truck bearing registration no. HR 38 Z 6075.
However, the vehicle developed technical defects and could reach Churaibari only on 18.03.2022, after the e-way bill had expired.
The seller approached the court via WP(C) 285 of 2022, and the court directed the release of the goods and the vehicle on the seller's giving an undertaking or bond and directed the respondent no. 3 to provide appropriate information to the assessing officer.
However, the respondent violated the said direction and assessed the driver of the vehicle with taxable liability, and issued a demand notice to the petitioner. Consequently, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

Issue –

Order –

The Court observed that the seller had requested permission to file a reply to the show-cause notice but the seizing officer had disregarded this request and issued a notice imposing tax and penalty without providing an opportunity of being heard. This act is in violation of Section 129(3) and Section 129(4) of the CGST and SGST Act, 2017.
The Court had previously issued a direction, but the respondent did not comply with it. Even the respondents did not feel it necessary to issue any notice upon the petitioner in terms of the order passed by this court after passing of the judgment, this act is purely non-compliance of the order passed by this court. Therefore, the impugned order and demand are quashed and set aside, and the writ petition is allowed.
However, the respondents are at liberty to take appropriate steps in accordance with the law.

Post Category