https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753207 Under the State GST regime, detention and penalty for alleged double movement of goods could not be sustained where the authorities failed to produce reliable documentary proof that the same invoice and e-way bill were used twice. The alleged driver statement was not shown in primary form, and later supplied papers had limited evidentiary value, so no presumption of wrongdoing could arise from the allegation alone. The authorities also did not establish mens rea for tax evasion. The seizure, penalty and appellate orders were therefore quashed. en-us Mon, 13 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 28 May 2024 10:11:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753207 Under the State GST regime, detention and penalty for alleged double movement of goods could not be sustained where the authorities failed to produce reliable documentary proof that the same invoice and e-way bill were used twice. The alleged driver statement was not shown in primary form, and later supplied papers had limited evidentiary value, so no presumption of wrongdoing could arise from the allegation alone. The authorities also did not establish mens rea for tax evasion. The seizure, penalty and appellate orders were therefore quashed. Case-Laws GST Mon, 13 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753207