https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770498 Mere non-filling of Part-B of an e-way bill was treated as a technical breach and not, by itself, a sufficient basis for penalty under the Uttar Pradesh GST detention provisions. The authority had relied on the admitted omission and an alleged Rule 138 violation, but no finding was recorded that the movement of goods involved an attempt to evade tax. In the absence of such a finding, penalty under Section 129(3) could not be sustained, and the writ petition succeeded with the penalty order set aside. en-us Fri, 09 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 12 May 2025 09:01:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770498 Mere non-filling of Part-B of an e-way bill was treated as a technical breach and not, by itself, a sufficient basis for penalty under the Uttar Pradesh GST detention provisions. The authority had relied on the admitted omission and an alleged Rule 138 violation, but no finding was recorded that the movement of goods involved an attempt to evade tax. In the absence of such a finding, penalty under Section 129(3) could not be sustained, and the writ petition succeeded with the penalty order set aside. Case-Laws GST Fri, 09 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770498