https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448749 Penalty and seizure orders under the Uttar Pradesh GST law were found unsustainable where goods were covered by invoice and e-way bill, the vehicle had broken down, and a revised e-way bill was produced before the seizure order. The court treated the discrepancy in vehicle details as a technical lapse and held that, absent fraudulent or deliberate intent to evade tax, mens rea is required for penal action under Section 129 read with Rule 138. The impugned orders were quashed and the deposited amount was directed to be refunded. en-us Wed, 24 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 10 Oct 2025 11:51:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448749 Penalty and seizure orders under the Uttar Pradesh GST law were found unsustainable where goods were covered by invoice and e-way bill, the vehicle had broken down, and a revised e-way bill was produced before the seizure order. The court treated the discrepancy in vehicle details as a technical lapse and held that, absent fraudulent or deliberate intent to evade tax, mens rea is required for penal action under Section 129 read with Rule 138. The impugned orders were quashed and the deposited amount was directed to be refunded. Case-Laws GST Wed, 24 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448749