2024 (5) TMI 750 - HC - GST

Penalty order - Part-B of the e-way bill was not filled up - intent to evade tax - HELD THAT - In the present case, the facts are quite similar to one in M/s Roli Enterprises' case 2024 (1) TMI 813 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT and there are no reason why this Court should take a different view of the matter, as the invoice itself contained the details of the vehicle and the error committed by the petitioner was of a technical nature only and without any intention to evade tax. Once this fact has been substantiated, there was no requirement to levy penalty under Section 129(3) of the Act. The orders dated 22.5.2023 and 29.2.2024 are quashed and set-aside - the writ petition is allowed.

Summary

Issues involved: Interpretation of penalty u/s 129(3) of the Act for non-filling of Part-B of the e-way bill without intention to evade tax.

Summary:

Issue 1: Imposition of penalty for non-filling of Part-B of the e-way bill without intention to evade tax

The petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the order imposing a penalty for not filling up Part-B of the e-way bill. The original order and the order passed in appeal both imposed the penalty based on this issue. The petitioner argued that a similar issue was addressed in a previous judgment, where it was held that non-filling of Part-B of the e-way bill without proof of intention to evade tax should not lead to the imposition of a penalty.

Decision: The court found that the facts of the present case were similar to the previous judgment and that the error in filling the e-way bill was of a technical nature without any intention to evade tax. Therefore, the court quashed and set aside the orders imposing the penalty, allowing the writ petition and granting consequential reliefs.

This judgment clarifies the interpretation of penalty u/s 129(3) of the Act in cases where non-compliance with e-way bill requirements is due to technical errors without any intention to evade tax.