The Karnataka High Court held that the validity of Unloading of goods after expiry of E-way bill may be extended for 8 hours which reached destination before expiry of E-way Bill.
The petitioner, Hemanth Motors a dealer in TVS motor vehicles and an assessee registered under the provisions of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, purchased two-wheeler vehicles from a wholesale dealer under the tax invoice, and the motor vehicles purchased were dispatched from Hosur, Tamil Nadu to the place of destination after generating the corresponding e-way bills.
The e-way bills were valid from December 31, 2018, 10:37 pm to January 1, 2019. The respondent authority visited the petitioner’s premises and issued an order for physical verification culminating in notice under the provisions of Section 129(3) of the Act and the other relevant provisions. The petitioner is also served with demand.
The petitioner ensured transportation of the vehicles under appropriate e-way bills that were valid from December 31, 2018, at 10.37 pm to January 1, 2019. The petitioner contends that the conveyance carrying the vehicles reached the place of destination on January 1, 2019, before the expiry of the validity of the e-way bills but the vehicles could not be unloaded on the same day and were being unloaded on January 2, 2019.
The authorities while not disputing these assertions contend that the e-way bills had to be valid even at the time of the inspection as the vehicles were being unloaded from the conveyance.
The single-judge bench of Justice Shyam Prasad held that the appellate authority should have considered the merits of the proceedings against the petitioners in the light of the provisions of Rule 138(10) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 which prescribes the validity of an e-way bill with the extension of further period by eight hours after the expiry. The failure to consider the petitioner’s case in the light of the provisions of Rule 138(10) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 has resulted in an improper and untenable order.Subscribe Taxscan AdFree to view the Judgment