03-Oct-2023: A vehicle is intercepted in Uttar Pradesh. The goods were being transported from Kolkata to Delhi. Upon physical verification being made, it was found that there was no discrepancy in relation to the consignment and the goods were as per the invoice and E-way bill.

06-Oct-2023: With effect from 18-Sep-2023, the West Bengal (CGST) authorities suspended the GST Registration of the Supplier (Petitioner, Kolkata).

11-Oct-2023: Goods detained on the ground that both the consignor and consignee were declared non-existent.

Note: On 03-Oct-2023 (date of interception) the Supplier was having a valid CGST Registration.

19-Oct-2023: UP GST Authorities passed Order U/s 129(1)(b) whereas Petitioner claimed that as he is the owner of goods and has come forward Order should be passed U/s 129(1)(a).

Penalty:
S.129(1)(a): Where owner of goods (consignor or consignee) comes forward: 100% of the Tax payable on such goods

S.129(1)(b): Where the owner does not comes forward: 50% of the value of goods reduced by the tax amount paid thereon.

High Court held:
It is patently clear that in the present case, goods were found with proper tax invoice and E-way bill belonging to the petitioner.

The order passed by the authorities dated October 19, 2023 is quashed and set aside.

The authorities are directed to carry out the exercise in terms of Section 129(1)(a) of the CGST Act within a period of three weeks.

Title: Halder Enterprises vs State of Uttar Pradesh
Court: Writ Tax No. - 1