Just a moment...
We've upgraded AI Search on TaxTMI with two powerful modes:
1. Basic
• Quick overview summary answering your query with references
• Category-wise results to explore all relevant documents on TaxTMI
2. Advanced
• Includes everything in Basic
• Detailed report covering:
- Overview Summary
- Governing Provisions [Acts, Notifications, Circulars]
- Relevant Case Laws
- Tariff / Classification / HSN
- Expert views from TaxTMI
- Practical Guidance with immediate steps and dispute strategy
• Also highlights how each document is relevant to your query, helping you quickly understand key insights without reading the full text.
Help Us Improve - by giving the rating with each AI Result:
Powered by Weblekha - Building Scalable Websites
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
The HC upheld the levy of IGST and penalty for detention of goods due to non-generation of Part B of the E-way bill, despite the consignment being accompanied by a tax invoice with a Letter of Undertaking number, consignment note, and letter of credit. The court affirmed that under Rule 138 of the MPGST Rules, both Part A and Part B of FORM GST EWB-01 must be generated electronically before the movement of goods exceeding Rs. 50,000 in value. The absence of Part B invalidated the E-way bill, rendering the transportation unauthorized. The court held that generation of Part B is a mandatory statutory requirement to validate the movement, especially for export consignments. Consequently, the impugned order imposing tax and penalty was found proper, and the petition was dismissed.