Bona fide e-way bill error cannot sustain detention, tax demand, or penalty absent any material of tax evasion.

A bona fide error in e-way bill particulars, causing an incorrect destination entry and unintended expiry, did not justify detention of goods or imposition of tax and penalty. The HC accepted that the shipment was meant for Haridwar and found no material indicating tax evasion, undisclosed sale, or ill-intent. The breach was treated as technical rather than substantive, and the orders passed under Section 129(3) of the U.P. GST Act, 2017 were set aside. Relief was granted with directions for return of the deposited amount in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: Whether tax and penalty were sustainable for detention of goods allegedly on expiry of the e-way bill, where the expiry was caused by an inadvertent error in filling the e-way bill particulars.

Analysis: The petitioner's goods were intercepted during transit with an e-way bill that showed an incorrect destination entry. The error in the shipment details led the system to generate an unrealistically short validity period, resulting in expiry of the e-way bill. The record disclosed that the shipment was meant for Haridwar and there was no material suggesting any intention to evade tax or to use the goods for an undisclosed sale. In these circumstances, the breach was technical and the explanation of inadvertence was accepted as genuine.

Conclusion: The detention, tax demand, and penalty were unjustified and the orders under Section 129(3) of the U.P. Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 were set aside in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: Relief was granted by quashing the impugned orders and directing return of the deposited amount in accordance with law.

Ratio Decidendi: A technical and bona fide error in e-way bill particulars, without any material of tax evasion or ill-intent, does not justify levy of tax and penalty for detention of goods.

---