- The petitioner, engaged in milk product manufacturing and retail, faced detention of goods during intra-state stock transfers due to an expired e-way bill caused by a driver’s personal issue.
- The petitioner argued there was no intent to evade tax as all documents were in order, while the department claimed GST provisions were violated due to the expired e-way bill.
- The Allahabad High Court noted the goods were in transit as stock transfers, not sales, and the driver’s mistake was promptly explained without being disproved by authorities.
- The court found no evidence of intent to avoid tax, rendering penalty proceedings invalid.
- The court referenced previous cases supporting the view that without intent to evade tax, penalty proceedings should not be initiated.
- The court quashed the orders and directed a refund of any deposited amounts.
- The case highlights the importance of intent in penalty proceedings and challenges minor procedural compliance issues under GST law.
Source: elplaw.in
Note that this post was (partially) written with the help of AI. It is always useful to review the original source material, and where needed to obtain (local) advice from a specialist.
Latest Posts in "India"
- Tripura HC: ITC Cannot Be Denied to Bona Fide Purchaser for Supplier’s Tax Default
- Ready-to-Drink Non-Alcoholic Beverages Like Mojito to Attract 40% GST, Rules WB AAR
- Bombay HC: Assignment of Long-Term Industrial Leasehold Rights Not Taxable as ‘Supply’ Under GST
- ITC Not Allowed on Mall Construction for Leasing, Rules Tamil Nadu AAR under GST Law
- Section 74 Cannot Be Invoked for GST Return Mismatches Without Evidence of Fraud or Suppression
