https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777832 HC allowed the petition, quashed the impugned orders, and directed refund of the amount deposited to the petitioner. The court held the goods (electronic items) were verified against tax invoices and serial numbers, revealing no discrepancy; the use of a different vehicle and failure to update the e-way bill was a technical lapse by the transporter and did not demonstrate intent to evade tax. The petitioner's explanation about vehicle change was accepted, and no adverse inference could be drawn from the e-way bill omission. en-us Mon, 01 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 05 Sep 2025 08:10:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777832 HC allowed the petition, quashed the impugned orders, and directed refund of the amount deposited to the petitioner. The court held the goods (electronic items) were verified against tax invoices and serial numbers, revealing no discrepancy; the use of a different vehicle and failure to update the e-way bill was a technical lapse by the transporter and did not demonstrate intent to evade tax. The petitioner's explanation about vehicle change was accepted, and no adverse inference could be drawn from the e-way bill omission. Case-Laws GST Mon, 01 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777832