GST: Penalty cannot be Imposed if there is no Intention to Evade Tax for Typographical Errors in E-Way Bill, says Allahabad HC [Read Order]
Penalty cannot be Imposed if there is no Intention to Evade Tax for Typographical Errors in E-Way Bill, rules Allahabad HC
Penalty – Evade Tax – Typographical Errors – E-Way Bill – Allahabad HC – allahabad high court – taxscan
Penalty – Evade Tax – Typographical Errors – E-Way Bill – Allahabad HC – allahabad high court – taxscan
The Allahabad High Court observed that the penalty cannot be imposed under GST if there is no intention to evade GST for typographical errors in E-Way Bill.
The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is a duly registered dealer under the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 and is a seller of cosmetics. The petitioner was supplying cosmetics to another registered dealer, namely, M/s Shree Sai Infotech in Jharkhand and the transaction was duly covered by a tax invoice, a bilty and e-way bill, all dated May 23, 2018.
It was the contention of the petitioner that the consignment of goods was sent by the petitioner in Vehicle No.DL1 AA 5332. When the vehicle was in transit, the same was intercepted on 23.5.2018 10.40 P.M. by the Goods and Service Tax authorities. The seizure order was passed on the ground that the vehicle number in Part-B of the e-way bill was incorrect as the e-way bill showed the vehicle bearing No.DL1 AA 3552 instead of DL1 AA 5332.
Apart from the above factual position, it is clear that there was no other infraction on the part of the petitioner. Furthermore, the authorities have imposed penalty only on the ground that the vehicle number was not mentioned correctly. There is no allegation of any attempt by the petitioner for evasion of tax as the e-way bill, bilty and the tax invoice were matching and the consignee was also a registered dealer.
The Counsel on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that number 5332 was typed incorrectly as 3552. He has submitted that this is so obviously a typographical error and similar mistake has also been made in the impugned order that has been passed by the authority concerned and .further relied upon a coordinate Bench judgment of this Court in M/s. Varun Beverages Limited v. State of U.P. and 2 others
Per contra, the Additional Chief Standing Counsel has submitted that the Department via a circular has allowed non imposition of penalty in cases where there are mistake of two digits in the vehicle number and no further.
A Single Bench of Justice Shekhar B. Saraf observed that “In the present case, instead of ‘5332’, ‘3552’ was incorrectly entered into the e-way bill which clearly appears to be a typographical error. In certain cases where lapses by the dealers are major, it may be deemed that there is an intention to evade tax but not so in every case. Typically when the error is a minor error of the nature found in this particular case, I am of the view that imposition of penalty under Section 129 of the Act is without jurisdiction and illegal in law.”
To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
