Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
+ Post a Query
Post a New Query
Title :
0/200 char
Description :
Max 0 char
Category :
Delete Reply

Are you sure you want to delete your reply beginning with '' ?

Delete Issue

Are you sure you want to delete your Issue titled: '' ?

Discussion Forum

Back

All Issues

Advanced Search
Reset Filters
Search By:
Search by Text :
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms
Select Date:
FromTo
Category :
OR
Search by Issue ID:
NOTE: If you have inputs in both the fields, then results will be shown for issueId first.
Issue ID :

Non Generation of E-Invoice

THYAGARAJAN KALYANASUNDARAM

Dear Experts,

One of my clients has taken steel structural work contracts from other states. While dispatching partial goods to the customer site through transport, only a delivery challan and an e-way bill were accompanied, as the value could not be determined until the contracts are completed. However, the roving squad officer intercepted the vehicle and imposed a penalty of 200% under Section 129(3) of the GST Act for the non-generation of an e-invoice. We explained the situation to him, but he did not agree. He insisted that the penalty be paid online before releasing the goods. To avoid delays in delivery, my client remitted the penalty of 200%. Now, my client wishes to challenge the order.

Thanks in advance.

Steel Contractor Penalized 200% Under GST Act Section 129(3) for Missing E-Invoice Plans to Appeal Penalty A client involved in steel structural work contracts was penalized 200% under Section 129(3) of the GST Act for not generating an e-invoice during goods transport, despite having a delivery challan and e-way bill. The penalty was paid to avoid delivery delays, but the client intends to challenge the decision. Experts advised filing an appeal under Section 107, citing judicial precedents that penalties for technical errors without tax evasion attempts are often overturned. The consensus is that the appeal has a strong chance of success due to favorable judgments for taxpayers in similar cases. (AI Summary)
answers
Sort by
+ Add A New Reply
Hide
+ Add A New Reply
Hide
Recent Issues