<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Court Reduces Penalty for Expired E-Way Bill, Highlights Need for Mens Rea Consideration and Fair Penalty Calculation.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=77070</link>
    <description>Levy of penalty @200% - e-way bill which was generated by the appellant had expired and at the time when the vehicle was intercepted four days had lapsed - The High Court acknowledged that penalties should not be imposed without considering mens rea. While the statute allows for a penalty of 200%, it does not absolve authorities from considering circumstances and intentions. Despite the expiration of the e-way bill, the Court found that the appellant&#039;s failure to extend the validity was a crucial factor. However, it noted that the penalty was calculated on a higher value than the invoice, indicating arbitrariness on the part of the authorities. Ultimately, the Court partially allowed the appeal, imposing a reduced penalty but refrained from completely exonerating the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 02 May 2024 09:47:41 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 May 2024 09:47:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=751748" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Court Reduces Penalty for Expired E-Way Bill, Highlights Need for Mens Rea Consideration and Fair Penalty Calculation.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=77070</link>
      <description>Levy of penalty @200% - e-way bill which was generated by the appellant had expired and at the time when the vehicle was intercepted four days had lapsed - The High Court acknowledged that penalties should not be imposed without considering mens rea. While the statute allows for a penalty of 200%, it does not absolve authorities from considering circumstances and intentions. Despite the expiration of the e-way bill, the Court found that the appellant&#039;s failure to extend the validity was a crucial factor. However, it noted that the penalty was calculated on a higher value than the invoice, indicating arbitrariness on the part of the authorities. Ultimately, the Court partially allowed the appeal, imposing a reduced penalty but refrained from completely exonerating the appellant.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 May 2024 09:47:41 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=77070</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>