https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427429 Penalty and seizure were challenged on the ground that Part-B of the e-way bill was not filled due to a technical glitch. The HC held that mere non-filling of Part-B, absent any allegation or material showing transportation without payment of tax, does not establish intent to evade tax, particularly where the taxpayer's explanation was corroborated by Ministry of Finance circulars/advisories acknowledging systemic difficulties in filling Part-B. Consequently, the seizure/penalty order could not be sustained, and the writ was allowed with a direction to refund the amount collected pursuant to the impugned order within two months. en-us Tue, 06 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 22 Dec 2025 13:25:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427429 Penalty and seizure were challenged on the ground that Part-B of the e-way bill was not filled due to a technical glitch. The HC held that mere non-filling of Part-B, absent any allegation or material showing transportation without payment of tax, does not establish intent to evade tax, particularly where the taxpayer's explanation was corroborated by Ministry of Finance circulars/advisories acknowledging systemic difficulties in filling Part-B. Consequently, the seizure/penalty order could not be sustained, and the writ was allowed with a direction to refund the amount collected pursuant to the impugned order within two months. Case-Laws GST Tue, 06 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427429