Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Levy of penalty - the e-way bill had expired one hour fifteen minutes prior to interception - The High Court acknowledged that while the e-way bill had expired, the goods were accompanied by the necessary documents, and the delay was due to a vehicle breakdown. Citing previous judgments, the court emphasized that mens rea, or intention to evade tax, is essential for penalty imposition. It concluded that there was no evidence of such intent in this case. The court held that the authorities failed to consider the explanation for the delay, rendering the penalty unjustified. - It emphasized that the breach was minor and did not indicate any intention to evade tax. - The court concluded that the penalty order under Section 129(3) of the Act was not warranted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.