Specialized Investment Fund distribution now requires dedicated certification, while transitional recognition preserves existing qualified distributor...
Overlapping GST proceedings require Central and State authorities to designate one competent authority for coordinated adjudication of the same matter...
Composite healthcare supplies retain exemption when patient care is the contract's essential character, despite payment through an implementing agency...
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 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
