The E-way Bill shall not be valid for movement of goods by road unless the information in Part-A and Part-B of FORM GST EWB-01 has been furnished correctly.
Goods in transit— In the instant case, appellant has imported the goods ABRASIVES from China. During the course of verification of vehicle by the officers of CGST Division, B, Jaipur the E-way Bill Number 721075239264, dated 4-6-2019 of Part-A of E-way Bill was having the shipping address Shivaji Nagar, Madanganj, Kishangarh, Rajasthan-305801 whereas, in Part-B of E-Way Bill the vehicle Number was shown different as RJ-19-GF-0560. Thus it is clear that the E-way Bill found during verification was not valid/proper for movement of vehicle.
Held that— the goods were found loaded in vehicle No. RJ 14 GE 4146 whereas, in Part-B of GST EWB-01 the vehicle number was mentioned as RJ 19 GF 0560. Therefore the driver of the vehicle was not carrying a valid E-way Bill at the time of interception of the vehicle. Thus, the appellant’s contention is not acceptable. The E-way Bill shall not be valid for movement of goods by road unless the information in Part-A and Part-B of FORM GST EWB-01 has been furnished correctly. The case laws cited by the appellant in their defence is not squarely applicable in the instant case.
The E-way Bill shall not be valid for movement of goods by road unless the information in Part-A and Part-B of FORM GST EWB-01 has been furnished correctly.
Goods in transit— In the instant case, appellant has imported the goods ABRASIVES from China. During the course of verification of vehicle by the officers of CGST Division, B, Jaipur the E-way Bill Number 721075239264, dated 4-6-2019 of Part-A of E-way Bill was having the shipping address Shivaji Nagar, Madanganj, Kishangarh, Rajasthan-305801 whereas, in Part-B of E-Way Bill the vehicle Number was shown different as RJ-19-GF-0560. Thus it is clear that the E-way Bill found during verification was not valid/proper for movement of vehicle.
Held that— the goods were found loaded in vehicle No. RJ 14 GE 4146 whereas, in Part-B of GST EWB-01 the vehicle number was mentioned as RJ 19 GF 0560. Therefore the driver of the vehicle was not carrying a valid E-way Bill at the time of interception of the vehicle. Thus, the appellant’s contention is not acceptable. The E-way Bill shall not be valid for movement of goods by road unless the information in Part-A and Part-B of FORM GST EWB-01 has been furnished correctly. The case laws cited by the appellant in their defence is not squarely applicable in the instant case.