Goods intercepted without e-way bill; subsequent generation invalidates defence—Penalty upheld under Section 129.

Case: Piyush Agarwal v. State of U.P. & Others

Citation: Writ Tax No. 802 of 2025

Court/Bench: Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench)

Coram: Hon’ble Pankaj Bhatia, J.

Date of Decision: 27-08-2025

Whether subsequent generation and production of e-way bill after interception validates transportation of goods and negates liability under Section 129 of the GST Act.

• Petitioner, a registered dealer, was transporting goods from Aligarh on 10.01.2020.
• Goods were intercepted at Jalalpur, Aligarh at 07:53 AM; no e-way bill was produced at that time.
• An e-way bill was generated later at 01:19 PM on the same day and shown before seizure proceedings.
• Authorities seized goods, imposed tax and penalty, and rejected appeal against the seizure order.

The Court held that since the e-way bill was not generated prior to movement and was produced only after interception, the case fell within the ruling of M/s Aysha Builders & Suppliers. Defence of absence of intent to evade tax was rejected. Writ petition dismissed, upholding tax and penalty orders.

An e-way bill must be valid and generated prior to commencement of movement; subsequent generation after interception cannot cure the lapse and attracts Section 129 liability.

Businesses must ensure that e-way bills are duly generated before dispatch of goods to avoid detention and penalty. Post facto generation is not acceptable in law. Proper compliance systems and checks should be implemented in logistics processes to prevent exposure to litigation and financial penalties.