Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
- ⚖️ Instantly identify judgments decided in favour of the Assessee, Revenue, or Appellant
- 🔍 Narrow down results with higher precision
Try it now in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New Feature Launched ✕
Just a moment...
Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
Try it now in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Highlights
of of All Highlights
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of HC set aside penalty orders under GST Act Section 129(1) and allowed refund application. The appellate authority's dismissal was deemed unjustified as there was no clear tax evasion intent. While the e-way bill showed dispatch from Durgapur without full supplier details, the court found this omission insufficient to establish evasion, noting the goods moved in the same vehicle (WB 41D 1508) as per both e-way bill and tax invoice. The court emphasized that acceptance of dispatch details in the e-way bill portal's Part-A submission indicated compliance, and mere incomplete supplier information didn't constitute tax evasion intent. The court directed authorities to process refund applications as per law.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
