Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Balkrishna Industries Limited, filed a writ petition before the Gujarat High Court challenging orders dated 29.11.2025 and 02.12.2026 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of State Tax, Appeal Division-11, Rajkot, under Form GST APL-04. The petitioner sought a declaration that penalty of Rs. 18,00,140/- under Section 129(1)(a) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act) is not imposable for expiry of E-way Bill in case of exported goods, and sought a direction for refund of the said amount. The petitioner's counsel, Mr. Chiranjeev Tandon, argued that the issue was squarely covered by the decision of the Gujarat High Court in Marcowagon Retail Pvt Ltd vs. Union of India, (2025) 32 Centax 85 (Guj.). The court had earlier on 13.02.2026 directed the respondents to take instructions on whether the issue was covered. On 23.02.2026, the Assistant Government Pleader, Ms. Nimisha Parekh, conceded that the case was squarely covered by the Marcowagon decision. The court noted that the Marcowagon decision dealt with transportation of goods at zero rated supply vis-a-vis Section 5(1) read with Section 7(5) of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (IGST Act) and Rules 89 and 96 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017. The court held that the issue was covered and allowed the petition, setting aside the impugned orders and directing the respondents to refund the penalty amount of Rs. 18,00,140/- within four weeks.
Headnote
A) Goods and Services Tax - Penalty - Expiry of E-way Bill - Section 129(1)(a) of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - The issue was whether penalty under Section 129(1)(a) of CGST Act is imposable for expiry of E-way Bill in case of exported goods - The Court held that the issue is squarely covered by the decision in Marcowagon Retail Pvt Ltd vs. Union of India, (2025) 32 Centax 85 (Guj.), which dealt with transportation of goods at zero rated supply vis-a-vis Section 5(1) read with Section 7(5) of IGST Act and Rules 89 and 96 of CGST Rules - The Court allowed the petition and directed refund of penalty amount (Paras 4-7).
Issue of Consideration
Whether penalty under Section 129(1)(a) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 is imposable for expiry of E-way Bill in case of exported goods
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. The impugned orders dated 29.11.2025 and 02.12.2026 are set aside. The respondents are directed to refund the penalty amount of Rs. 18,00,140/- to the petitioner within four weeks.
Law Points
- Penalty under Section 129(1)(a) of CGST Act not imposable for expiry of E-way bill in case of exported goods
- zero-rated supply
- Section 5(1) read with Section 7(5) of IGST Act
- Rules 89 and 96 of CGST Rules
