M/S M.D. Traders vs State Of Uttar Pradesh And Another on 8 October, 2025

[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Allahabad High Court

M/S M.D. Traders vs State Of Uttar Pradesh And Another on 8 October, 2025

Bench: Saumitra Dayal Singh





HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:178121-DB
 

 
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD 
 
WRIT TAX No. - 4501 of 2025   
 
   M/S M.D. Traders    
 
  .....Petitioner(s)   
 
 Versus  
 
   State Of Uttar Pradesh And Another    
 
  .....Respondent(s)       
 
   
 
  
 
Counsel for Petitioner(s)   
 
:   
 
Pranjal Shukla   
 
  
 
Counsel for Respondent(s)   
 
:   
 
C.S.C.   
 
     
 
 Court No. - 3
 
   
 
 HON'BLE SAUMITRA DAYAL SINGH, J.

HON'BLE INDRAJEET SHUKLA, J.

1. Heard Shri Pranjal Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Ankur Agarwal, learned counsel for the revenue.

2. Present petition has been filed for the following relief:"i) issue a writ or direction or pass an order in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned notice in DRC-01/Form GST MOV-07 dated 20.08.2025 and the impugned order issued in GST Form GST MOV-09 dated 26.08.2025 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, State Tax Jurisdiction Sector-2 (Mobile Squad-2) Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh, respondent no.2, (Annexure no.9 & 11 the writ petition)."

3. Submission is, undeniably, goods were found accompanying with the tax invoice clearly disclosing full particulars of the owner of the goods, a registered dealer.

4. Thus, whatever infringement may have been alleged for reason of e-way bill not accompanying the goods, it may have resulted in penalty in terms of Section 129(1)(a) of the U.P. Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'), only. However, the Adjudicating Authority has erroneously computed the penalty in terms of Section 129(1)(b) of the Act. On that issue, reliance has been placed on Halder Enterprises vs State of U.P., (2023) 13 Centax 144 (All). That petition was allowed on the following terms:

"12. In light of the above, 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 from today."

5. For reason of similar facts and there have been no other dispute, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the present petition pending or calling for counter affidavit at this state, let the writ petition be decided with the consent of the parties at the fresh stage.

6. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 26.08.2025 is set aside with the direction upon the authorities to determine the quantum of penalty in accordance with Section 129(1)(a) of the Act within a period of three weeks from today.

7. Subject to the petitioner depositing the penalty amount in terms of Section 129(1)(a) of the Act on the value of the goods as mentioned in the tax invoice, the goods may be released forthwith.

8. If any other dispute survives arising from order imposing penalty, the petitioner may avail its statutory remedies in accordance with law.

9. With the aforesaid observation, present petition stands disposed of. Pending application/s, if any, stand disposed of.

(Indrajeet Shukla,J.) (Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.) October 8, 2025 Prakhar

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Allahabad High Court