Allahabad High Court Monthly Tax Digest: January 2024

1. UP GST | No Interference Under Article 226 Unless Inherent Lack Of Jurisdiction Or Absence Of Relevant Material Established: Allahabad High CourtCase Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 4The Allahabad High Court has held that the writ court should not interfere in notice issued under Section 73 of the UP Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 unless there is inherent lack of jurisdiction or complete absence of relevant material is alleged and established.The bench comprising of Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh and Justice Manjive Shukla held that “The satisfaction required to be recorded in terms of Section 61(3) of the Act is primarily subjective. Unless inherent lack of jurisdiction or complete absence of relevant material is alleged and established, no interference may be warranted in exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction of this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.”2. Typo Error In E-Way Bill, Penalty Can't Be Imposed If There Is No Intention To Evade Tax: Allahabad High CourtCase Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 9The Allahabad High Court has held that a minor typographical error in the e-way bill without any other material establishing an intention to evade tax will not attract a penalty under Section 129 of the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017.Placing reliance on the decision of Allahabad High Court in M/s. Varun Beverages Limited v. State of U.P. and 2 others, the judgment of Supreme Court in Assistant Commissioner (ST) and others v. M/s. Satyam Shivam Papers Pvt. Ltd. And another, Justice Shekhar B. Saraf held that“Upon perusal of the judgments, the principle that emerges is that the presence of mens rea for evasion of tax is a sine qua non for imposition of penalty. A typographical error in the e-way bill without any further material to substantiate the intention to evade tax should not and cannot lead to the imposition of penalty.3. CGST Act | Once Registration Is Cancelled, Uploading Notice On Portal Not Sufficient Notice, Must Be Given At Assesee's Address: Allahabad HCCase citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 14The Allahabad High Court has held that once the registration of the assesee is cancelled, any notice for proceedings under the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 shall be served on the address of the assesee. The Court observed that merely uploading notice on the web portal without any intimation to the assesee will vitiate any subsequent action as being bad in law. Elaborating on the need for judicious application of the principle of audi alteram partem in legal and administrative proceed, Justice Shekhar B. Saraf held that“In the present case, when the petitioner had cancelled its registration in the year 2019, a proper notice was required to be issued to it under Section 74 of the Act at its address. However, the authorities simply uploaded the Section 74 show cause notice on the web portal inspite of knowing that the petitioner had already cancelled its registration prior to the date of issuance of the show cause notice. This action clearly prevented the petitioner from appearing in the hearing in the original proceeding under Section 74 of the Act that was accordingly passed ex parte.”4. UPGST | Truck Is Capital Asset Of Transporter, Seizure Without Notice Affects Civil Rights: Allahabad High CourtCase citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 25The Allahabad High Court has held that the seizure of a vehicle transporting goods affects the civil rights of the transporter as the truck is a capital asset of the transporter. The Court held that the transporter ought to be afforded an opportunity of hearing before passing any penalty order against him. While observing that the vehicle carrying the goods could be released under proviso-1 of Section 129 (6) of the UP Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 on payment of Rs. 1 Lakh, the bench comprising of Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh and Justice Manjive Shukla held that“Truck being the valuable property and a capital asset of the transporter which is utilised to generate revenue/ income, we perceive valuable civil right of the petitioner having being adversely affected exparte.”5. UPGST | Invoice Contains Vehicle Details, Error In Not Filling Part-B Of E-Way Bill Technical: Allahabad High Court Quashes Penalty OrderCase citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 31The Allahabad High Court has held that if the invoice accompanying the goods contains all the details of the vehicle then not filing of Part-B of the e-way bill is a technical error without any intention to evade tax. The court quashed the penalty order under Section 129(3) of the UP Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017.Relying on the decision of the Allahabad High Court in M/s Citykart Retail Private Limited through Authorized Representative v. Commissioner Commercial Tax and Another, Justice Shekhar B. Saraf held that“In the present case, the facts are quite similar to one in M/s Citykart Retail Pvt. Ltd.'s case (supra) and I see no reason why this Court should take a different view of the matter, as the invoice itself...

Allahabad High Court Monthly Tax Digest: January 2024

Upasna Agrawal

Tags