Depreciation and routine compliance expenses disallowance did not prove inaccurate particulars or misreporting; penalty sustained only on foreign trav...
Page of 4823
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3381 to 3400 of 96456 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The HC set aside the penalty imposed under section 129(3) of the GST Act for non-filing of Part-B of the e-way bill, finding no intent to evade tax. The petitioner demonstrated that the omission was due to a technical glitch, a fact undisputed in the record. The Court relied on precedents affirming that mere non-filing of the e-way bill does not attract penalty absent a tax evasion intent. As no authority below recorded any finding of willful tax evasion, the penalty was unwarranted. Consequently, the petition was allowed, and the impugned order imposing the penalty was quashed.
The HC set aside the penalty imposed under section 129(3) of the GST Act for non-filing of Part-B of the e-way bill, finding no intent to evade tax. The petitioner demonstrated that the omission was due to a technical glitch, a fact undisputed in the record. The Court relied on precedents affirming that mere non-filing of the e-way bill does not attract penalty absent a tax evasion intent. As no authority below recorded any finding of willful tax evasion, the penalty was unwarranted. Consequently, the petition was allowed, and the impugned order imposing the penalty was quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4823 
Join Channel 
