The difference between quantity mentioned in the invoices and quantity found in Physical Verification is huge and as abnormal difference was found when compared to the invoices available at the time of interception of conveyance with the quantity mentioned in the invoice. Therefore, the adjudicating authority has rightly taken into account the quantity found excess in Physical verification while passing the impugned order.
Section 129 of the CGST Act, 2017 — Goods in Transit — The appellant’s conveyance was intercepted on 04.10.2018 and on the basis of physical verification, the calculation were made and the total value of impugned goods found in excess arrived at Rs. 4,75,420/- on which GST payable was Rs. 85,576/-. The goods were detained and a SCN was issued to the appellant which culminated into the impugned order dated 05.10.2018. Being aggrieved with the impugned order, the appellant has filed this appeal. The authority observed that the difference between quantity mentioned in the invoices and quantity found in Physical Verification is huge and as abnormal difference was found. Therefore, the adjudicating authority has rightly taken into account the quantity found excess in Physical verification while passing the impugned order.
Held that:- The Hon’ble authority rejected the appeal.
The difference between quantity mentioned in the invoices and quantity found in Physical Verification is huge and as abnormal difference was found when compared to the invoices available at the time of interception of conveyance with the quantity mentioned in the invoice. Therefore, the adjudicating authority has rightly taken into account the quantity found excess in Physical verification while passing the impugned order.
Section 129 of the CGST Act, 2017 — Goods in Transit — The appellant’s conveyance was intercepted on 04.10.2018 and on the basis of physical verification, the calculation were made and the total value of impugned goods found in excess arrived at Rs. 4,75,420/- on which GST payable was Rs. 85,576/-. The goods were detained and a SCN was issued to the appellant which culminated into the impugned order dated 05.10.2018. Being aggrieved with the impugned order, the appellant has filed this appeal. The authority observed that the difference between quantity mentioned in the invoices and quantity found in Physical Verification is huge and as abnormal difference was found. Therefore, the adjudicating authority has rightly taken into account the quantity found excess in Physical verification while passing the impugned order.
Held that:- The Hon’ble authority rejected the appeal.