GST DAILY – 353 : HC directed dept. to refund penalty due to authority’s failure to act within 7 days of notice under Sec.129(3)
THE HON’BLE PATNA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF Kedia Enterprises V/s State of Bihar, decided on 25-9-2024
Tag: sec. 129 of cgst act
GST DAILY – 339 : HC set-aside seizure order as there was no intention to evade tax and part-B of E-way bill was duly filled
THE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF Fashion Safety Footwear Pvt. Ltd. V/s Additional Commissioner, Grade-2 (Appeal)-II, Commercial Tax, Jhansi
GST DAILY – 338 : Incomplete e-way bill due to technical error doesn’t justify penalty or adverse inference of tax evasion: HC
THE HON’BLE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF Ram Krishna Gupta V/s State of U.P. Writ Tax No. 728 of 2023, decided on 9-7-2024
GST DAILY – 335 : HC held that there is no requirement of disclosing transportation route hence it set aside penalty based on route deviation
THE HON’BLE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF Exide Industries Ltd. V/s Additional Commissioner Grade-II (Appeal)-1
GST DAILY – 325 : No penalty can be imposed without there being any intention or mensrea for evasion of tax: HC
THE HON’BLE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF Kumar Cargo Solution V/s State of U.P., decided on 1-8-2024
SC hold that Final adjudication order is a substantive safeguard and not mere formality
The Hon’ble Supreme Court in ASP Traders held that despite payment of tax and penalty under Section 129(1), the proper officer is obligated to pass a reasoned order under Section 129(3) to enable statutory appeals, and the deeming fiction under Section 129(5) does not absolve this duty where objections have been filed and payment made under protest.
The SC stopped the tactics of the Officers who were not passing the order u/s 129(3) CGST Act while taking reliance upon the provisions of section 129(5) – E-way bill Matter
The Tax Payer made the payment and the authorities released the goods but refused to pass a final, reasoned adjudication order, contending that upon payment, the proceedings were “deemed to be concluded” under Section 129(5) of the Act.
Tata Power hit with Rs 2.4 lakh penalty by UP Govt over tax document discrepancies
Tata Power has received a penalty of Rs 2,40,000 from Uttar Pradesh’s Deputy Commissioner of State Tax. The penalty comes regarding a matter of transportation of goods by the company, with some discrepancies in the accompanying documents.
No penalty can be levied on a zero-rated supply where no tax is payable, merely due to expiry of e-way bill
The Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Marcowagon Retail (P.) Ltd. held that no penalty under Section 129(1)(a) of the CGST Act, can be imposed where no tax is payable on zero-rated supplies; modified the penalty to INR 25,000.
No Penalty on Delayed e-way bill generation without intent to evade tax
The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in T.K. Printers held that tax and penalty under Section 129 of the CGST/UPGST Act cannot be imposed in absence of intent to evade tax, where e-way bill was generated before detention and the goods were part of a stock transfer, not meant for sale.