Dismissed

M/S Ashwin Auto Cast Private Limited v. the State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC28 Aug 2024CW/9260/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition filed by a taxpayer challenging the seizure of goods due to expired E-way bills was dismissed. The High Court found no force in the petitioner's defense regarding vehicle breakdown and deemed the E-way bills validly expired without extension.

What did the court decide?

The prayer to set aside orders and direct payment of refund with interest is dismissed.

M/S Ashwin Auto Cast Private Limited Vs the State of… — GST and Indirect Tax | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9260/2024

¶3

M/s Ashwin Auto Cast Private Limited, Through Its Director Shri Gautam Shankarlal Patel, Having Its Registered Address At 02, Praful Society, Near Swatio Society, Sardar Patel Stadium, Ahmedabad - 380009.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Joint Secretary (Tax), Finance Department (Tax Division), 1St Floor, Main Building, Gate-2, Government Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan- 302005

¶7

Assistant Commissioner (State Tax), B-Ii, Enforcement Wing-I, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

¶8

Appellate Authroity, State Tax, Jaipur-I, Jaipur.

¶9

Union Of India, Through Finance Department, North Block, Room No. 74B, New Delhi- 110001

¶10

----Respondents

¶11

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mohit Singhvi through VC For Respondent(s) : Mr. Katikeya Sharma for Mr. Sandeep Taneja, AAG : Ms. Nachiketa Pareek

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR

¶13

Order

¶14

28/08/2024

¶15

Petitioner has preferred this writ petition with a prayer for setting aside and quashing of the orders dated 04.01.2023 and 20.02.2024 passed by the respondent(s) with a further prayer that respondents be directed to refund the amount of Rs.15,38,316/- along with interest.

¶16

[CW-9260/2024]

¶17

(2 of 3)

¶18

It is contended by counsel for the petitioner that E-way bills were generated for transporting of iron cast from Ahmedabad to Noida and the same were valid upto 31.12.2022. However, the truck was seized at Beawar on 01.01.2023 and orders have been passed on the ground that E-way bills have expired. It is also contended that the petitioner-company has received various awards for payment of GST, there was breakdown of the truck bearing registration No.GJ-01-HT-4476, the repair bill of which was submitted before the authorities and so the goods could not be transported within due time and the E-way bills expired. It is further contended that the amount has already been paid and the matter pertains only to refund of the amount with interest. It is contended that the authorities have not considered the repair bill and the fact of breakdown of the vehicle.

¶19

We have considered the contentions. 4. In the E-way bills, the distance has been mentioned as 978 kms. The E-way bills were generated on 26.12.2022 at 6:27 pm and was valid upto 31.12.2022 till 11:59 pm. It is an admitted position that E-way bills were not extended. As per Rule 138(10) of the RGST/CGST Rules 2017, validity of E-way bill may be extended within eight hours from the time of its expiry. The vehicle was seized at 5:45 pm at Beawar on 01.01.2023 and the E-way bills were not extended prior to that.

¶20

We are not convinced with the defence taken up by the petitioner with regard to breakdown of the vehicle because as per the E-way bill, the vehicle should have reached Noida on or before 31.12.2022 and as per the defence taken up by the petitioner, the vehicle was at Rajasamand on 31.12.2022. If the vehicle was

¶21

[CW-9260/2024]

¶22

(3 of 3)

¶23

under repair in Rajasamand on 31.12.2022, there was no possibility of vehicle reaching Noida before the expiry of the period of E-way bill. Petitioner thus should have applied for extension of the E-way bill.

¶24

Even if the authorities have not considered the repair bill, we are not inclined to entertain the present petition as we ourselves are not satisfied with the repair bill which is dated 31.12.2022, the date on which the E-way bills expired and the date on which the goods should have reached Noida.

¶25

Consequently, we do not find any force in the present civil writ petition and the same is accordingly, dismissed.

¶26

(ASHUTOSH KUMAR),J

¶27

(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J

¶28

HEENA/43

M/S Ashwin Auto Cast Private Limited v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Ashwin Auto Cast Private Limited v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Santosh Devi Sharma Wife of Shri Nirmal Kumar Sharma, Vs Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd.

Vyom Foodcraft Private Limited Vs Vyam Food Craft India Private Limited

The State of Rajasthan Vs Smt. Usha Sharma Wife of Late Shri Suresh Chand Sharma

Rampratap Singh S/O Late Shri Narayan Singh Ji Vs Hari Sharma S/O Late Shri Ramanand Sharma

Inox Leisure Limited Vs Union of India and Ors.

Surendra Singh Bijarniya S/O Shri Ramdev Singh Bijrania Vs the State of Rajasthan