Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
Bvm Trans Solutions Private Limited, Represented By Mr Prem Sundar, Deputy General Manager – Appellant
Versus
Commercial Tax Officer – Respondent
ORDER :
S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR, J.
1. In this petition, petitioner seeks for the following reliefs:-
A. Set aside the order dated 29.11.2024 passed by the Respondent No. 3 bearing No. ADCOM(SMR)-2/APP- 4/GST/SMR-02/2024-25 under Section 108 (1) of the KGST & CGST Act R/w Rule 109B(2) of the KGST/CGST Rules, 2017 at Annexure - A by issuing Writ of Certiorari;
B. Declare that no penalty under Section 129 of the Karnataka Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 and Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 can be levied when tax has been paid on the goods and merely on the ground that Part - B of E-Way bill is not updated by issuing a Writ of Mandamus;
C. Consequently, set aside order of the Respondent No. 2 vide bearing de G57. A.P.No. 300/23-24 order dated 18.03.2024 under Section 107(11) of the KGST and CGST Act, 2017 to the extent of levy of penalty of Rs. 25,000/- at Annexure K by issuing a Writ of Certiorari;
D. Grant any other relief in favour of the Petitioner as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the above case, in the interest of justice and equity.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA for the respondents and perused the material on record.
3
Penalties under GST Act require evidence of intent to evade tax; mere technical omissions do not warrant penalties when tax has been duly paid.
Penalties under Section 129 of the CGST Act must not apply to minor infractions without intent to evade tax, emphasizing moderation and rectifiability of documentation errors.
Minor procedural lapses in compliance with tax regulations should not attract severe penalties, especially when there is no intent to evade tax.
Intention to evade tax is a prerequisite for imposing penalties under GST Act; mere technical issues should not warrant such penalties.
Minor documentation discrepancies do not imply intent to evade tax, and valid transport documents render penalty imposition inappropriate.
For imposition of penalties under the GST Act, intent to evade tax must be established; mere expiration of documents does not suffice.
Minor errors in e-way bills do not justify detention under Section 129 of the CGST Act if the goods are otherwise properly documented.
Minor discrepancies in transport documentation do not warrant penalties under Section 129 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, with general penalties appropriately applied instead under Section....
The intention to evade tax, non-taxable nature of goods movement, and the relevance of valid documents are crucial in imposing penalties under Section 129 of the Act.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
