No Penalty Shall be Levied Merely Due to Error With Regard to Address of Consignee in E-Way Bill | HC

Case Details: Ridhi Sidhi Granite and Tiles v. State of U.P. - [2024] 160 taxmann.com 191 (Allahabad)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• • Shekhar B. Saraf, J.
  • Rishi Raj Kapoor, CSC for the Petitioner.

Facts of the Case

In the present case, the GST officer levied detained goods of the petitioner and found that there was incorrect address mentioned in e-way bill. The penalty was levied and the petitioner filed writ petition against the order levying penalty on the ground that the correct address was mentioned in invoice but address of the consignee was wrongly written in the E-Way Bill.

High Court Held

The Honorable High Court noted that the invoice contained address, goods matched description in invoice and all other materials were intact but address of the consignee was wrongly written in the E-Way Bill. However, the authorities had not been able to indicate any mens rea on part of petitioner for evasion of tax and penalty was levied only on basis of technical error.

The Court further noted that the presence of mens rea for evasion of tax was a sine qua non for imposition of penalty and mere technical error would not lead to imposition of penalty. Thus, the Court held that the impugned order was to be set aside and amount deposited by petitioner was to be refunded to it.

List of Cases Referred to

• • Modern Traders v. State of U.P. 2018 (14) G.S.T.L. 184 (All.) (para 4)
  • Galaxy Enterprises v. State of U.P [2023] 156 taxmann.com 291/100 GST 706/2023 (79) G.S.T.L. 160/(2023) 12 Centax 137 (All.) (para 4)
  • Hindustan Herbal Cosmetics v. State of U.P. [2024] 158 taxmann.com 200/(2024) 14 Centax 80 (All.) (para 4).