GST: Not mentioning tax amount in the e-way bill by transporter is not contravention of GST law as no separate field in form
This is the observation made by Kerala High Court in the case of
M.S. Steel and Pipes v. Assistant State Tax Officer – [2020] 119 taxmann.com 211 (Kerala).
The short overview of the case is as under :
The department had detained the goods in transit of the petitioner who is a transporter on the grounds of existence of discrepancy in the e-way bill accompanied during transportation of the goods. As per the department, there was no mention of the tax amounts separately in the e-way bill that accompanied the goods. Further, the department was of the view that the e-way bill is a document akin to a tax invoice, in relation to an assessment to tax, and if the same do not contain the details regarding the tax amount, then the transportation done shall be viewed in contravention of the provisions of Act and Rules for the purposes of detention.
The petitioner submitted that there is no requirement under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act (‘CGST Act’) and Central Goods and Services Tax Rules (‘CGST Rules’) to mention the tax amount separately in the e-way bill FORM GST EWB-01 by the transporter.
The Hon’ble High Court in this regard observed that detention under Section 129 of the CGST Act can be exercised only where a transportation of goods is done in contravention of the provisions of the Act and Rules and not merely because a document relevant for assessment does not contain details of tax payment.
A person transporting goods is obliged to carry only the documents enumerated in Rule 138(A) of GST Rules, during the course of transportation which are the invoice or bill of supply or delivery challan and the copy of e-way bill in physical form or e-way bill Number in electronic form. The above stated rule clearly indicates that the e-way bill has to be in FORM GST EWB-01. However, there is no field wherein the transporter is required to indicate the tax amount payable in respect of the goods transported. If the statutorily prescribed form does not contain a field for entering the details of the tax payable in the e-way bill, then the non-mentioning of the tax amount cannot be treated to be done in contravention of the rules.
Since, in the present case, consignment was transported with valid invoice indicating tax amount and e-way bill, there was no contravention by the petitioner of any provision of the Act or Rule for the purpose of detention.
Therefore, detention of petitioner goods by the department was not justified.
