Reusing E-way Bills Demonstrates Intention Of Tax Evasion: Punjab And Haryana High Court Upholds Penalty Against Transporter
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has upheld the penalty against the transporter and ruled that reusing e-way bills demonstrates the intention of tax evasion.The bench of Justice G.S. Sandhawalia and Justice Harpreet Kaur Jeewan has observed that the ‘intention to evade payment of tax’ is an essential ingredient for initiating proceedings against a person under Section 130. The...
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has upheld the penalty against the transporter and ruled that reusing e-way bills demonstrates the intention of tax evasion.
The bench of Justice G.S. Sandhawalia and Justice Harpreet Kaur Jeewan has observed that the ‘intention to evade payment of tax’ is an essential ingredient for initiating proceedings against a person under Section 130. The transporter had tried to reuse the e-way bills and the tax invoices; as such, the intention to evade the payment of tax is impliedly proven on record.
The appellant/assessee is engaged in the business of transportation of goods by road. The appellant’s consignment loaded in a vehicle was intercepted and detained by the Asstt. Excise and Taxation Officer under Section 68 (3) of the CGST Act, 2017 read with Section 68 (3) of the HGST Act, 2017 and Section 20 of the IGST Act by issuing a seizure memo.
The appellate authority observed that it is a case of the reuse of documents with mala fide intention to evade tax with legitimate due tax to the Government. The goods were not covered by genuine documents.
The order passed by the Proper Officer demanding the tax and imposing the penalty was held legal by the appellate authority while observing that hiding the truth and tendering falsehood are as per se acts of mens rea to evade the tax due to the State’.
The court noted that when it was observed that the quantity of scrap mentioned in the documents produced by the driver varied from the quantity of the documents that were being carried at the time of interception of the vehicle, keeping in mind the long delay between the date of issuance of the e-way bills and the date of interception of the vehicle, the appellate authority rightly held that it was a case of reuse of the documents.
The court held that the order passed by the Proper Officer under Section 129 as well as under Section 130 of the CGST Act, 2017, read with the provisions of the IGST Act, 2017, is legal and valid and has been rightly upheld by the appellate authority.
Case Title: M/s Bright Road Logistics Versus State of Haryana and Others
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (PH) 142
Case No.: CWP-2490-2019 (O&M)
Date: 09.08.2023
Counsel For Petitioner: Keane Sardhina, Sumit Saini
Counsel For Respondent: Arun Beniwal