Patna High Court Dismisses GST Penalty Plea Over Expired E-Way Bill During Transit

The Patna High Court dismissed a writ petition filed by M/S Kishan Cement Stores against the Bihar State Tax authorities regarding a GST penalty imposed during the transportation of goods.

In the case of the petitioner, the Deputy Commissioner of State Tax had detained a vehicle (bearing no. JH15AC794) carrying goods on October 11, 2025, vide an order of detention in Form GST MOV-06 and a notice in Form GST MOV-07, dated October 13, 2025. Thereafter, the concerned authorities initiated penalty proceedings in the case where the owner or person-in-charge of the vehicle had made the payment of the proposed tax and penalty.

However, during the personal hearing before the Patna High Court, the petitioner claimed that they were compelled to pay the levied penalty of about Rs 2 lakh under the Central Goods and Services Tax/Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, along with interest deposited because the goods in question needed to be transported urgently for business purposes. Additionally, the tax authorities had not granted them a proper opportunity of hearing before levying the impugned penalty, which is an explicit contravention of the principles of natural justice under the CGST/BGST Act, 2017.

Further claimed that the detained goods were backed by an invoice and an e-way bill; however, the e-way bill had expired during transit because of a technical issue in the vehicle. The petitioner claimed that they did not have any intention of evading tax.

The tax authorities informed the court that after the detention of the vehicle in question, they had issued a notice in Form GST MOV-07. The owner later voluntarily paid the tax and penalty, after which the authorities released the goods and vehicle through Form GST MOV-05 dated October 13, 2025.

When the court analysed the case, it noted that the petitioner had paid the levied penalty and tax amount without raising any objections at the same time. It further noted that the GST law provides a statutory remedy of appeal within three months against such orders, but the petitioner failed to file any appeal and directly approached the High Court after about four months. Consequently, the Patna High Court dismissed the writ petition, holding that there was no clear violation of the principles of natural justice or a jurisdictional error.