Works contract classification governs composite layout-development contracts where VAT-paid goods are transferred alongside construction and infrastru...
Specified income tax exemption for pollution control body remains conditional on non-commercial activity, unchanged income character, and return filin...
Jurisdictional facts in certificate-of-origin discrepancies can support customs show-cause proceedings, leaving factual explanations for departmental ...
The HC upheld the levy of GST and penalty on the petitioner for failing to generate and upload Part B of the E-Way bill, specifically the vehicle details, in violation of Section 129 of the GST Act and Rule 138 of the CGST Rules. The Court affirmed that the primary responsibility to generate Part B of FORM GST EWB-01 lies with the registered person initiating the movement of goods exceeding Rs. 50,000 in value. The petitioner's contention that the transporter was liable to complete Part B was rejected. The petitioner failed to generate Part B before transporting goods valued at Rs. 7,62,247 over 800 km, rendering the Part A invalid and non-compliant. The delay of three days in updating Part B was held as a substantial violation, not a minor error. Consequently, the impugned order imposing GST and penalty was affirmed, and the petition was dismissed.
The HC upheld the levy of GST and penalty on the petitioner for failing to generate and upload Part B of the E-Way bill, specifically the vehicle details, in violation of Section 129 of the GST Act and Rule 138 of the CGST Rules. The Court affirmed that the primary responsibility to generate Part B of FORM GST EWB-01 lies with the registered person initiating the movement of goods exceeding Rs. 50,000 in value. The petitioner's contention that the transporter was liable to complete Part B was rejected. The petitioner failed to generate Part B before transporting goods valued at Rs. 7,62,247 over 800 km, rendering the Part A invalid and non-compliant. The delay of three days in updating Part B was held as a substantial violation, not a minor error. Consequently, the impugned order imposing GST and penalty was affirmed, and the petition was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
