https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95466 Whether the penalty quantified under Section 129(1)(a) of the U.P. GST Act, 2017 was computed erroneously was the dominant issue. Applying the principle in a prior binding decision on similar facts, the Court held that the penalty must be re-determined strictly in accordance with the statutory formula under Section 129(1)(a), and an order reflecting an incorrect computation cannot be sustained. Consequently, the impugned penalty order was set aside and the tax authorities were directed to re-compute and determine the penalty afresh within three weeks, and the writ petition was disposed of. - HC en-us Sat, 27 Dec 2025 08:06:01 +0530 Sat, 27 Dec 2025 08:06:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95466 Whether the penalty quantified under Section 129(1)(a) of the U.P. GST Act, 2017 was computed erroneously was the dominant issue. Applying the principle in a prior binding decision on similar facts, the Court held that the penalty must be re-determined strictly in accordance with the statutory formula under Section 129(1)(a), and an order reflecting an incorrect computation cannot be sustained. Consequently, the impugned penalty order was set aside and the tax authorities were directed to re-compute and determine the penalty afresh within three weeks, and the writ petition was disposed of. - HC Highlights GST Sat, 27 Dec 2025 08:06:01 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95466