E-way bill expiry explained by vehicle breakdown did not justify tax and penalty, with refund directed.

Marginal expiry of an e-way bill by about three hours, when explained by a mechanical fault in the transporting vehicle and supported by documents, did not justify tax and penalty. The court found the delay to be minor and the explanation credible, so the adverse orders confirming the demand were unwarranted. The adjudicating and appellate orders were set aside, and refund of the tax and penalty was directed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the tax and penalty imposed for expiry of the e-way bill by about three hours were sustainable, where the expiry was explained by mechanical fault in the vehicle and supported by documents.

Analysis: The expiry of the e-way bill was found to be only marginal. The explanation that the delay occurred because of a mechanical fault in the transporting vehicle was supported by relevant documents. In these circumstances, the adverse orders confirming tax and penalty were not warranted.

Conclusion: The orders of the adjudicating authority and the appellate authority were set aside, and the petitioner was held entitled to refund of the tax and penalty.

---