Page 181 - GSTL_11th June 2020_Vol 37_Part 2

2020 ] IN RE : WHIRLPOOL OF INDIA LIMITED 267
5. 8-7-2019 6-8-2019 Not Attended
6. 8-8-2019 (final) 11-9-2019 A.R. Attended

3. Sri V. Satyanarayana, Sales Tax Practitioner and Authorized Repre-
sentative of the supplier (hereinafter referred to as ‘A.R.’) has appeared on earlier
occasions and finally on 11-9-2019 for arguing the case. Finally, the appeal was
heard by the Appellate Authority.
Statement of facts :
4. The appellant is an assessee on the rolls of the Assistant Commis-
sioner of State Tax, Tenali, Gandhi Chowk Circle, No-I Division, Vijayawada.
5. The IA stated in his order that the appellant has transported goods
vide Tax Invoices No’s (1) 912810025168, dated 18-8-2018 (2) 912810025169, dated
18-8-2018 connected with ‘e’ Waybills No’s. (1) 191060235414, dated 18-8-2018 (2)
181060236795, dated 18-8-2018 worth of goods for Rs. 4,74,340/-. The IA further
stated that the goods vehicle has been checked on 20-8-2018, thus noticed that the
‘e’ Waybills have been expired because they were only valid up to 19-8-2018.
6. Therefore, the IA treating that the goods have been transported
without valid ‘e’ Waybill, hence Levied Tax under CGST/APGST Act, 2017 as
shown below :

Act Tax Penalty Total
CGST 42,690/- 42,690/- 85,380/-
SGST 42,690/- 42,690/- 85,380/-

7. The IA also recorded that the appellant has admitted the offence and
paid tax & penalty as applicable on his own.
8. Thus, the assessing authority has passed orders under CGST &
APGST Acts, dated 29-8-2018, by levying total amount of Rs. 1,70,760/-.
9. Aggrieved by the above orders passed by the assessing authority, the
appellant has preferred the present appeal and disputed the levy of tax & penalty
in total amount of Rs. 1,70,760/-.
Grounds of appeal :
10. The grounds of appeal filed by appellant in the appeal are extracted
hereunder;
(1) The action of the Deputy Assistant Commissioner-III (ST), Gandhi
Chowk Circle for collecting the tax of Rs. 85,380/- (SGST 42690 + CGST
42690) and penalty of Rs. 85,380/- (SGST 42690 + CGST 42690) for the
goods under transport on the allegation of expiry of ‘e’ waybill without
considering facts and circumstances of the case.
(2) The appellant relies upon the Hon’ble AP High Court in the case of
Good Health Agro Tech Limited, Hyderabad v. CTO, Mahaboobnagar Circle,
(1996) 22 APSTJ 78 AP High Court it was held that “Collection of advanced
tax at the check point while the transport is covered by proper papers un-
der the guise of protecting the State revenue amount to arbitrary exaction
without any authority of law and violative of Art. 265 of the constitution”
and also Hon’ble High Court Judgment in Ambica Lamp House, Rajahmundry
v. CTO (Int.)-I, Enft., Hyderabad (2005) 40 APSTJ 56 APHC.
(3) The provisions of Section 122 of the APGST Act has no application to
the facts of case sub-item (xiv) of section 122 speaks transports any taxable
GST LAW TIMES  11th June 2020  181