Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 680 (ALL)

COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL GOODS & SERVICES TAX v. M/S MAHARASHTRA FREIGHT CARRIERS PVT. LTD.

CEXAD/11/2026 · 2026-03-18

Saumitra Dayal Singh, Vivek Saran

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 11 of 2026 Court No. - 3 HON'BLE SAUMITRA DAYAL SINGH, J. HON'BLE VIVEK SARAN, J. 1. Heard Sri B.K.S. Raghuvanshi, learned counsel for the revenue and perused the record. Re: Civil Misc. Delay Condonation Application No. 01 of 2026 2. Present appeal has been filed with a delay of 2 days. 3. Cause shown is sufficient. Delay in filing the present appeal is condoned. Delay condonation application is allowed. Order on Appeal 4. The present appeal has been filed against the order of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellant Tribunal, Allahabad dated 06.08.2025 in Excise Appeal No. 70639 of 2025 (M/s Maharashtra Freight Carriers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of CGST, Noida). By that order, the Tribunal has deleted the penalty imposed by the opposite party under Rule 29 of the Central Excise Rules, 2017. 5. The appeal has been pressed on the following question of law : "(iii) Whether the Hon'ble Tribunal erred in setting aside the personal penalty imposed on persons involved in committing the offence of tax Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Bijendra Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : Commissioner, Central Goods & Services Tax .....Appellant(s) M/S Maharashtra Freight Carriers Pvt. Ltd. .....Respondent(s) evasion, categorically explained and linked with the facts in the Order in Original, under Rule 29 of the Central Excise Rules, 2017 ?" 6. Having heard learned counsel for the revenue and having perused the record, we find no good ground to interfere in the present appeal inasmuch as the noticee was only a transporter who had transported the goods. That transportation being by a bailee that too in his capacity as transporter, the Tribunal has found that no evidence was led by the revenue to establish subject knowledge of the transporter that the offending goods have been transported to evade tax. 7. The present appeal lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. March 19, 2026 Abhilash CEXAD No. 11 of 2026 2 (Vivek Saran,J.) (Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- ABHILASH SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad