The Allahabad High Court ruled that when Part-B of the e-way bill could not be filled due to a technical glitch attributable to the Revenue Department, but there was no intention to evade payment of tax, then the manufacturer cannot be saddled with a penalty.
Finding that none of the Revenue authorities had recorded any finding claiming intention to evade payment of tax on the part of the petitioner, nor have they disputed the technical glitch, the Court quashed the order levying penalty under Section 129(3) of the GST Act.
A Single Judge Bench of Justice Piyush Agrawal observed that the short issue involved in the present case concerns the levy of penalty under section 129(3) of the GST Act, based on non-filling of Part-B of the E-way bill.
Referring to the decision in the case of M/s Tata Hitachi Construction Machinery Company Private Limited Vs. State of U.P. & Others [Writ Tax No. 2148/2025], the Bench reiterated that non-filling of E-way bill will not attract penalty under section 129(3) of the GST Act.
Briefly, the petitioner’s goods were intercepted and seized only on the ground that Part B of the E-way bill accompanying the goods was not updated, and later, saddled with a penalty. When the petitioner challenged the same, the Respondent department justified the proceedings by claiming that the goods were in movement and Part B of the e-way bill was not duly filled.
Appearances:
Advocate Pranjal Shukla, for the Petitioner/ Taxpayer
CSC, for the Respondent/ Revenue
