<?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>Penalty Reduced for Technical E-Way Bill Violation; No Tax Evasion Intent Found; Original Rs. 11,08,150 Penalty Cut to Rs. 25,000.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=83177</link>
    <description>Challenge to penalty order u/s 129(1) of CGST Act for non-generation of Part-B of E-way bill. Petitioner accepted notice and paid Rs. 11,08,150 penalty voluntarily without objection. Respondent justified in passing penalty order for violating Section 129(1). However, petitioner had no intention of tax evasion, transporting goods from port after customs clearance. Part-A of e-way bill generated, only Part-B not accompanying goods when intercepted. Petitioner liable for penalty equivalent to 200% of tax payable, but since IGST already paid, subjected to 200% of tax paid. Contravention of Rule 138 technical as goods not accompanying Part-B. Penalty u/s 129(1)(a) modified to Rs. 25,000 instead of Rs. 11,08,150 to justify technical violation of not having Part-B. Impugned penalty order modified to Rs. 25,000.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 16 Nov 2024 08:38:49 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 16 Nov 2024 08:38:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=778097" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Penalty Reduced for Technical E-Way Bill Violation; No Tax Evasion Intent Found; Original Rs. 11,08,150 Penalty Cut to Rs. 25,000.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=83177</link>
      <description>Challenge to penalty order u/s 129(1) of CGST Act for non-generation of Part-B of E-way bill. Petitioner accepted notice and paid Rs. 11,08,150 penalty voluntarily without objection. Respondent justified in passing penalty order for violating Section 129(1). However, petitioner had no intention of tax evasion, transporting goods from port after customs clearance. Part-A of e-way bill generated, only Part-B not accompanying goods when intercepted. Petitioner liable for penalty equivalent to 200% of tax payable, but since IGST already paid, subjected to 200% of tax paid. Contravention of Rule 138 technical as goods not accompanying Part-B. Penalty u/s 129(1)(a) modified to Rs. 25,000 instead of Rs. 11,08,150 to justify technical violation of not having Part-B. Impugned penalty order modified to Rs. 25,000.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 16 Nov 2024 08:38:49 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=83177</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>