2025 (11) TMI 1537

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 1. Heard Mr. Pranjal Shukla for the petitioner and Mr. R.S. Pandey, learned ACSC for the State-respondents. 2. By means of present petition, the petitioner is assailing the order dated 20.2.2024 passed by respondent no. 3 and order dated 24.6.2024 passed by respondent no. 2. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a proprietorship firm registered under the GST....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....been assigned. He further submits that Part - B of the e-way bill could not be filled due to some technical glitch. He further submits that there was no intention to evade payment of tax. He further submits that all other documents were duly filled, except Part - B of the e-way bill and the authorities below have not whispered a word indicating intention of the petitioner to evade payment of tax. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ly filled and therefore, the proceedings have rightly been initiated against the petitioner but he could not dispute the legal proposition enumerated in the aforesaid judgements relied upon by the counsel for the petitioner. 7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, the Court has perused the record. 8. The short issue involved in the present case is with regard to penalty under secti....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of the e-way bill could not be filled, which has not been disputed at any stage. 9. In the light of the aforesaid facts, there was no intention of the petitioner to evade payment of tax, which would amount to levy of penalty under section 129(3) of the GST Act. 10. In view of the aforesaid facts & circumstances of the case, the impugned orders cannot be sustained in the eyes of law and same....