TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Taxpayer Wins Relief in E-Way Bill Documentation Case, Penalty Overturned on Technical Grounds</h1> <h3>JBJ Technologies Limited Versus The Chairman, Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs, Department Of Revenue & Ors.</h3> JBJ Technologies Limited Versus The Chairman, Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs, Department Of Revenue & Ors. - 2024 (81) G. S. T. L. 357 (Del.) Issues Involved:The judgment deals with the imposition of a penalty under Section 129 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act) on the petitioner by the Commissioner, GST Department, for errors in the e-way bill accompanying goods transported in vehicles.Imposition of Penalty under Section 129 of the CGST Act:The petitioner challenged the penalty imposed by the Commissioner, arguing that the facts did not warrant such a penalty. It was revealed that while the goods had all relevant documents, the e-way bill had an erroneous bill of entry. The petitioner explained that two bills of entry for similar goods were mistakenly mentioned on the e-way bills for different vehicles, resulting in one consignment having the error. The petitioner emphasized that there was no intention to evade tax, and the error did not lead to any tax evasion or avoidance.Availability of Alternative Remedies:The respondents contended that the petitioner could appeal the decision before the Appellate Authority under Section 107 of the CGST Act. Despite the petition being pending for over two years, the court noted that the notice was incorrectly accepted, and the delay in communication to the department was significant. The respondents argued that the department should not be faulted for not raising the issue earlier.Court's Decision and Observations:The High Court declined to entertain the petition due to the delay in communication and acceptance of the notice. The petitioner was advised to pursue alternative remedies, including filing an appeal within four weeks before the Appellate Authority. The court clarified that the Appellate Authority would consider the appeal without being influenced by the delay. The petition was disposed of with these observations.
TaxTMI 