GST: No E-Way Bill at Interception, Valid Seizure, Says High Court:

GST: No E-Way Bill at Interception, Valid Seizure, Says High Court M/s Birds Ro System Private Limited, a registered GST dealer involved in trading water purifiers and RO systems, issued multiple tax invoices in December 2021 pursuant to customer orders. Since the value in three invoices crossed Rs. 50,000, a threshold that mandates an e-way bill, the company instructed its transporter not to dispatch goods until the e-way bills were generated. However, despite this express instruction, the transporter loaded the goods in vehicle UP-65-FT-8974 and commenced the journey without waiting for the e-way bills. When the vehicle was intercepted by the Mobile Squad, only tax invoices were produced, with no e-way bill available. The goods were seized under Section 129. Additional Commissioner (Appeals)'s Decision: The appeal before the Additional Commissioner (Appeals) was dismissed, prompting the present writ petition. Main Issue: Whether the seizure of goods under Section 129 for the absence of an e-way bill was justified when the e-way bill was generated only after interception by the Mobile Squad. HC’s Decision: The High Court held that the seizure order was fully justified since the goods were being transported without a valid e-way bill at the time of interception. The Court emphasised that GST law mandates the generation of the e-way bill before the commencement of the movement of goods, and any bill generated later does not validate the transport retroactively. It further relied upon Aysha Builders & Suppliers, which drew a clear distinction between cases where an e-way bill already existed before detention and those where it was generated afterwards. The Court noted that its earlier ruling in Mohini Traders also held that the absence of an e-way bill at the time of inspection justifies seizure under Section 129. Since the petitioner could not dispute that no e-way bill existed when the journey commenced, and given the consistent judicial view on the issue, the Court found no basis for interference. The writ petition was therefore dismissed. To Read Full Judgment, Download PDF Given Below