^®
TaxReply India Private Limited

GST Library

Best GST Library

Subscription Plans

TaxGPT

GST News | Updates

GST Calendar

GST Case Laws

GST Case Laws Sitemap

GST Notifications, Circulars, Releases etc.

Act & Rules

Act & Rules (Multi-view)

GST Rates

HSN Codes ^New

GST Forms

GST Diary

GST Notebook

GST Fees Manager

GST Council Meetings

GST Set-off Calculator

ITC Reversal Calculator

E-invoice Calculator

Inverted Duty Calculator

GSTR-3B Manual

GSTR-9 Manual

GSTR-9C Manual

Full Site Search

E-way Bill

Finance Bill

GST e-books

TaxReply Support

YouTube Videos

Twitter

Buy Premium Tax Domains

About Us

Our Services

🔒

TaxReply India Pvt Ltd

🔒

^®

Subscribe Free GST updates on...

Subscribe to Best GST Library of India and get ahead of the rest. Click here for plans. | GST Act & Rules e-book Click here. |

ASHISH KUMAR SHARMA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER & OTHERS
(Calcutta High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

T. S. SIVAGNANAM
HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Pet. Counsel

Rajeev Kumar Agarwal

Rajarshi Chatterjee

Sanjay Dixit

Res. Counsel

T. Chakraborty

Petitioner / Applicant	ASHISH KUMAR SHARMA
Respondent	THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER & OTHERS
Court	Calcutta High Court
State	West Bengal
Date	Apr 25, 2024
Order No.	F. M. A. 504 OF 2024 I. A. NO. CAN 01 OF 2024
Citation	2024(4) TAXREPLY 9517
Add to Favorites	Add to favorites.
Download Original Order
Print (Full Page)
Print (Judgement Only)

Related Tags :

☍

Section 129

☍

Section 20

☍

Rule 138

TaxGPT ^Beta

Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

Listen this case in simple words

Audio Timeline

Audio Speed:

AA |

ORDER
JUDGMENT ( Judgment of the Court was delivered by T. S. Sivagnanam , CJ. ) 1. The unsuccessful writ petitioner is the appellant before us. The writ petition was filed challenging an order passed by the appellate authority under the provisions of the West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 dismissing the appeal filed by the appellant challenging the order passed by the adjudicating authority imposing penalty on the appellant on the ground that the e-way bill which was generated by the appellant had expired and at the time when the vehicle was intercepted four days had lapsed. 2. The learned writ court was of the view that the appellant though contended that the vehicle suffered a breakdown did not annexe supporting documents in the writ petition and merely contending that he had no intention to evade tax is not sufficient and if such contention is accepted transporting without a valid e-way bill will remain a piece of paper and a mere idle formality. 3. The follo....