Government water works contract GST concession applied before its withdrawal, while contractual tax reimbursement claims lay outside advance-ruling sc...
E-way bill validity requires Part B to state the actual vehicle used for movement; a concession for minor clerical errors does not cover entirely different vehicle particulars. Transport under an expired e-way bill bearing a wholly different vehicle number may support a rebuttable presumption of intent to evade tax. Mens rea is not required for a civil fiscal penalty unless the governing enactment makes it essential. The presumption remains rebuttable through surrounding facts, but failure to provide a satisfactory rebuttal supports penalty under the CGST/UPGST transport-of-goods provisions. On the stated facts, the penalty was sustained and the second appeal dismissed.
E-way bill validity requires Part B to state the actual vehicle used for movement; a concession for minor clerical errors does not cover entirely different vehicle particulars. Transport under an expired e-way bill bearing a wholly different vehicle number may support a rebuttable presumption of intent to evade tax. Mens rea is not required for a civil fiscal penalty unless the governing enactment makes it essential. The presumption remains rebuttable through surrounding facts, but failure to provide a satisfactory rebuttal supports penalty under the CGST/UPGST transport-of-goods provisions. On the stated facts, the penalty was sustained and the second appeal dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.