Back
SHEKHAR B. SARAF
Bmr Enterprises – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Shekhar B. Saraf, J.
Heard Sri. Rahul Agrwal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. R.S. Pandey, learned Standing Counsel for the State.
2. This writ petition has been filed assailing the penalty order dated August 9, 2023 passed by respondent no. 3 and the order dated October 31, 2023 passed by appellate authority, respondent no. 4.
3. The petitioner before this Court is a registered dealer under the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter called as "Act of 2017"). It is engaged in the business of trading electronic goods. The dealer was transporting goods from its unit at Agra to M/s Rawat Sales at Mathura. The goods were being shifted through Truck No. UP 83 CT 2724 which was accompanying delivery challan, e-way bill and bilty on 8.8.2023. The mobile squad on August 9, 2023 intercepted the goods and detained the vehicle in question along with the goods on the premise that in the e-way bill the vehicle number has been mentioned as UP 80 CT 7024. Detention order was passed on August 9, 2023. Thereafter, a penalty order under Section 129(3) of the Act of 2017 was passed imposing a tax and penalty totalling to Rs. 2,67,970/-. Against the said order, an appeal unde
Minor discrepancies in vehicle registration numbers on e-way bills, without intent to evade tax, do not warrant penalties under the Goods and Services Tax Act.
Minor clerical errors in e-way bills do not attract penalties under GST if there is no intent to evade tax.
The presence of mens rea for evasion of tax is essential for the imposition of a penalty under Section 129 of the Goods and Service Tax Act.
Penalties should be reserved for cases where there is a demonstrated actual intent to evade tax, and technical errors without potential financial implications should not be grounds for imposition of ....
A technical error in documentation without intent to evade tax does not justify penalty under the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Service Tax Act.
The imposition of penalties under tax laws requires clear evidence of intent to evade tax, and procedural fairness must be upheld in enforcement actions.
Minor errors in e-way bills do not justify detention under Section 129 of the CGST Act if the goods are otherwise properly documented.
E-way bill is mandatory for transporting goods; failure to carry it raises a presumption of tax evasion, which must be rebutted by the transporter.
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
