In WPA 3374 of 2022-CAL HC- Transportation of goods with proper e-way bill is salient feature of West Bengal GST Act and said provision of law can’t be diluted for granting relief to errant transporter: Calcutta HC
Justice Amrita Sinha [03-03-2023]

 

Read Order: Abinash Kumar Singh v. The State of West Bengal & Ors 

Tulip Kanth

Kolkata, March 7, 2023: While considering a case pertaining to the West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, the Calcutta High Court has opined that it is the duty of the owner/transporter/consignor/consignee to keep track of the consignment and do the needful for transporting the goods in accordance with law. The interception and detention of goods without valid documents are permissible in law.

“Section 129 of the Act opens with a non obstante clause which lends a mandatory character to the same”, Justice Amrita Sinha asserted.

The order of affirmation of the appellate authority and the order of the adjudicating authority imposing penalty upon the petitioner for transporting goods against an expired e-way bill both were under challenge in the writ petition.

The petitioner was transporting goods against an e-way bill which was generated on April 23, 2022. The vehicle of the petitioner was checked at the Cooch Behar check post on April 28, 2022. The petitioner alleged that despite producing all necessary documents in connection with the consignment, the check post authority kept the vehicle waiting and deliberately did not issue a gate pass permitting the vehicle to leave the check post. 

The vehicle was ultimately issued a gate pass on May 2, 2022, by which time, the e-way bill expired on April 30, 2022.

After the vehicle was released from Cooch Behar and was on the way to the final destination, the same was intercepted and being found that there wasn’t a valid e-way bill, Form GST MOV-01 and GST MOV 02 were issued with a prima facie opinion that the consignment was not supported by any valid documents. 

A detention order was issued in Form GST MOV 06 and show cause notice was issued in the name of the driver with a proposal for imposition of penalty under Section 129.

A further show cause notice was issued in the name of the petitioner.The adjudicating authority imposed penalty upon the petitioner. On payment of the penalty amount, the vehicle of the petitioner was released.

It was the petitioner’s case that he ought not to be imposed the penalty amount as the petitioner was in no way responsible for the delay in issuing the gate pass at Cooch Behar. 

The Bench noticed the fact that when the vehicle of the petitioner was intercepted, the same did not have a valid e-way bill. The e-way bill, on the basis of which the goods were transported, expired prior to the vehicle reaching the final destination.

Referring to the Act, the Bench opined that law bars transportation of certain goods beyond a particular distance without a valid e-way bill and the law prescribes generation of fresh e-way bill for transportation of goods if the same cannot be delivered on time.

“ Every transporter, prior to commencement of movement of goods exceeding value of rupees fifty thousand, is mandatorily required to furnish information relating to the goods electronically, on the common portal and the goods are required to be transported within the validity period as mentioned in the e-way bill. If, for exceptional circumstances, the goods cannot be transported within the period mentioned in the e-way bill, then there is provision for extending the validity period after updating the details in the portal. There is no provision to transport goods with an e-way bill which stood expired on the date of transportation”, the Bench observed.

Asserting that there is no scope to dilute the said provision of law for granting relief to an errant transporter, the Bench held that the petitioner may or may not be directly responsible for the delay in issuance of the gate pass, but he was certainly at fault in transporting goods without a valid e-way bill.

Thus, the Bench dismissed the petition after noting tha the appellate authority considered all the grounds raised by the petitioner in the appeal and passed the order applying the corresponding law.