Nancy Trading Company

VERSUS

State of UP WRIT TAX NO. 892 OF 2023 DATED 15.07.2024

Citation: 2024 taxo.online 1509

The Allahabad High Court in this case quashed the penalty orders imposed on the petitioner for not generating an e-tax invoice due to a bona fide mistake. It was noted that all other required documents under Rule 138A were present and there was no intent to evade tax. The proceedings under Section 129(3) of the GST Act were deemed unjustified in the absence of any finding of mens rea. The court ordered the refund of any amount deposited by the petitioner during the proceedings. 

In this case, the petitioner is a dealer who was transporting goods with accompanying documents such as tax invoice, GRs, and e-way bills. The goods were detained on the grounds that the petitioner did not generate an e-tax invoice as required by Rule 48 of the GST Rules, 2017. Penalty order u/s 129 was also passed.  It was argued that under Rule 138A, there is no requirement for carrying an e-tax invoice, and all necessary documents were present. The petitioner also contended that the turnover threshold for generating an e-tax invoice was recently reduced from 20 crores to 10 crores, which caused a bona fide mistake due to unawareness of the change.  

 

To read more about this Judgement, subscribe today: https://taxo.online/product/taxo-pro/

Already a subscriber, Click to LOGIN & refer to the TAXO GST CASE LAWS

     Or

Call us:- +91 99101 67919, 99996 93426