Goods & Conveyance to be Released After Payment of Nominal Penalty as There was Typographical Error in E-invoice | HC

Case Details: Tvl.T M Steel v. Deputy State Tax Officer - [2023] 154 taxmann.com 281 (Madras)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• • Mrs. S. Srimathy, J.

Facts of the Case

The petitioner had received an order for supply of goods and in turn it placed order for supply of above consignment with its supplier with instruction to directly send consignment to client. The supplier while raising e-invoice for supply of the said goods committed a typographical error in e-invoice and the vehicle was detained by the department and order of penalty under Section 129 was issued. It filed writ petition and challenged the demand.

High Court Held

The Honorable High Court noted that the supplier had in ‘billed to’ column, correctly mentioned name of recipient with correct address and GST number. However, in ‘shipped to’ column, instead of Tvl. T. Balaji, it had mentioned Tvl. T M Steel, but in address column, it had clearly mentioned address of Tvl. T. Balaji.

The Court further noted that it could be considered as typographical error only. Moreover, it was not mistake of petitioner but mistake committed by supplier. Further, the department had left goods in vehicle for 10 days, thereby damaging vehicle and goods and had not passed order under Section 129(3) of CGST Act within 7 days from date of service of notice. Thus, the detention of goods was against the provisions of CGST Act. Therefore, the Court held that the impugned order was to be modified directing petitioner to pay Rs. 5,000 only as penalty and vehicle & goods of petitioner to be released.