Penalty Under GST Set Aside Due to Minor Consignment Discrepancy; Refund Directed Pending New Consideration.

The HC set aside the impugned order imposing a penalty under Section 129 (1)(a) of the GST enactment due to a minor discrepancy in consignment details. The case was remitted to the respondent for fresh consideration, directing a refund of the penalty paid by the petitioner, subject to the final outcome of the new order. The writ petition was allowed without costs, and a related application was closed.

---

---

Issues:
Imposition of penalty under Section 129 (1)(a) of GST enactment for a discrepancy in consignment details. Maintainability of writ petition without exhausting appeal remedy under Section 107 of GST enactment.

Analysis:
The petitioner, engaged in construction activities, faced a penalty of Rs. 5,02,956 under Section 129 (1)(a) of GST enactment due to a discrepancy in consignment details. The consignor mistakenly listed the petitioner as the consignee instead of the actual contractor, M/s.Athish Engineering Systems. Despite the petitioner's responses to notices, the penalty was imposed. The respondent argued that the penalty was paid, and the consignment was released, making the issue final under Section 129 (5) of GST enactment.

The respondent contended that the writ petition was not maintainable as the petitioner should have pursued remedy under Section 107 by filing an appeal before the Appellate Authority. Failure to do so rendered the writ petition liable for dismissal. However, the court examined documents, including GST registration of M/s.Athish Engineering Systems, and found that the consignor's invoice and GST registration matched, with a minor discrepancy in the consignee's name.

The court, citing previous cases, acknowledged minor errors that were not tax evasion attempts. Despite the petitioner paying the penalty and receiving the detained consignment, the court set aside the impugned order. The case was remitted back to the respondent for fresh orders, with a directive to refund the penalty paid by the petitioner. The refund was subject to the final outcome of the new order. Consequently, the writ petition was allowed, with no costs imposed, and a related application was closed.

---