https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779804 Where goods were accompanied by a tax invoice identifying the owner as a registered dealer, the alleged contravention was limited to absence of the e-way bill. In that situation, penalty had to be computed under Section 129(1)(a) of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, rather than Section 129(1)(b). The order applying Section 129(1)(b) was unsustainable and was set aside to that extent, with recomputation directed under Section 129(1)(a) in favour of the assessee. en-us Wed, 08 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 13 Oct 2025 08:54:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779804 Where goods were accompanied by a tax invoice identifying the owner as a registered dealer, the alleged contravention was limited to absence of the e-way bill. In that situation, penalty had to be computed under Section 129(1)(a) of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, rather than Section 129(1)(b). The order applying Section 129(1)(b) was unsustainable and was set aside to that extent, with recomputation directed under Section 129(1)(a) in favour of the assessee. Case-Laws GST Wed, 08 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779804