2017 Taxo.online 54
WRIT TAX No. – 748 of 2017 dated 21.11.2017
M/s Manju Nath Trading Co. & 2 Ors.
State Of U.P. & 3 Ors.
2017
GST
CGST Rules
Rule 138
Bharati Sapru, Justice & Saumitra Dayal Singh, Justice
In favour of assessee
High Court
Allahabad
Requirement of E-way bill – Seizure of goods – Goods transported from Maharashtra were seized in the State of Uttar Pradesh on the pretext that the E-Way Bill not presented at the time of seizure – GST Council recommended that the requirement of filing the E-Way Bill is suspended till 31st March, 2018 – Petitioners stated in the writ petition & in rejoinder affidavit that they did obtain and present E-way bill before the authority but it was not accepted – Held: – Goods directed to be released forthwith subject to deposit of security to the extent of 50% of the value of goods in the shape of other than cash or bank guarantee, which will abide by penalty proceedings.
Represented by: –
Petitioner: – Aditya Pandey & Bipin Kumar Pandey
Respondent: – C.S.C., A.S.G.I. & B. K. Singh Raghuvanshi
Order: –
Heard Sri Aditya Pandey, learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State.
The facts of the case are not in dispute. The petitioner was carrying goods from Nagpur, State of Maharashtra to the State of Uttar Pradesh. The goods have been seized upon entering the State of Uttar Pradesh on the pretext that the E-Way Bill was not presented at the time of seizure of the goods, which were Supari.
It is not denied to the State that the recommendations have been made by the GST Council in the 22nd Meeting at New Delhi on 6th October, 2017 by which the requirement of filing the E-Way Bill has been suspended by the State Government for the time being. Even otherwise the petitioner has stated in the writ petition as well as in the rejoinder affidavit that he did obtain the E-Way Bill and he did present it before the authority concerned within two hours but it was not accepted by the respondent-State.
No reason has been given by the State in the counter affidavit for not accepting it. They have simply made a blank statement that it was never presented.
However, in view of the fact that there is a recommendation of GST Council that till 31st of March, 2018 the demand of an E-Way Bill will not be made. The demand itself and the consequential demand of cash security is not justified.
We therefore, direct the respondents to release the goods of the petitioner forthwith subject to deposit of security to the extent of 50% of the value of goods in the shape of other than cash or bank guarantee, which will abide by penalty proceedings.
With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.
