- 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"
- AAR Rules GST Applies to Small Packaged Shrimp Exports, Citing Retail Packaging Criteria
- Supreme Court to Decide if Leasehold Rights Transfer is Taxable Under GST Law
- Only Entity Named as Exporter in Customs Documents Can Claim Service Tax Refund: CESTAT
- CESTAT: Testing Services to Foreign Clients Qualify as ‘Export of Services’ under FTDR Act
- CESTAT Rules Dell India’s Services to Foreign Affiliates Qualify as Export, Allows Appeal
