https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758769 A typographical error in the e-way bill did not justify penalty under Section 129(3) of the CGST Act where the accompanying documents correctly reflected the taxable value of the goods. The Court found no indication of an intention to evade tax because the mistaken entry was obvious and the supporting papers matched the true value. It also accepted the departmental circular relied upon and held that sending the petitioner to the appellate remedy would serve no useful purpose on these facts. The detention order was therefore quashed and the penalty was not sustained. en-us Thu, 12 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 09 May 2025 18:19:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758769 A typographical error in the e-way bill did not justify penalty under Section 129(3) of the CGST Act where the accompanying documents correctly reflected the taxable value of the goods. The Court found no indication of an intention to evade tax because the mistaken entry was obvious and the supporting papers matched the true value. It also accepted the departmental circular relied upon and held that sending the petitioner to the appellate remedy would serve no useful purpose on these facts. The detention order was therefore quashed and the penalty was not sustained. Case-Laws GST Thu, 12 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758769