Incomplete E-Way Bill Due to Technical Error Without Evidence of Tax Evasion Doesn’t Justify Penalty | HC

Case Details: Ram Krishna Gupta v. State of U.P. - [2024] 164 taxmann.com 645 (Allahabad)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• Piyush Agrawal, J.
• Nikhil Pandey & Vedika Nath for the Petitioner.

Facts of the Case

The petitioner was transporting goods along with all required documents such as tax invoice, e-way bill and R.R. However, the Part-B of e-way bill was not filled due to technical error and the proceedings were initiated. The department imposed penalty for non-compliance and the same was confirmed by the Appellate Authority. It filed writ petition against the order.

High Court Held

The Honorable High Court noted that there was no finding that there was any discrepancy in quantity and quality of the goods. Further, there was no evidence with regard to evasion of tax and the only allegation was that Part-B of e-way bill was not filled.

Moreover, the Court relied on the judgment in the case of Citykart Retail Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner, Commercial Tax U.P. Gomti Nagar [2022] 144 taxmann.com 155 (Allahabad) and held that mere non-filling of Part-B of e-way bill without any evidence of tax evasion or discrepancy in quantity/quality of goods does not warrant adverse inference or penalty. Therefore, the Court held that the impugned penalty order was liable to be set aside.

List of Cases Reviewed

• Roli Enterprises v. State of U. P., [2024] 158 taxmann.com 468 (Allahabad) – [Para 10 ] followed
• Citykart Retail Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner, Commercial Tax U. P. Gomti Nagar, [2022] 144 taxmann.com 155 (Allahabad) – [Para10 ] followed

List of Cases Referred to

• Roli Enterprises v. State of U.P. [2024] 158 taxmann.com 468/102 GST 11/81 GSTL 444 (Allahabad) (para 4)
• Citykart Retail Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner Commercial Tax U.P. Gomti Nagar [2022] 144 taxmann.com 155 (Allahabad) (para 4).