No detention of goods and proceedings under Section 129 is maintainable for minor mistakes in E-Way bill.

Facts: 

• The goods were intercepted and detained by the respondent’s noticing discrepancy in the E-way bill regarding the date of invoice which was mentioned as 02.2021 instead of 02.03.2021.
• That during the pendency of the writ petition, the respondents issued an order in GST MOV – 09 under Section 129 (3) of the Act, imposing tax of Rs, 27,540/- and equivalent penalty for a mistake of date format in the E-way Bill.

Held: 

• That except date which has been mentioned as 02.2021 instead of 02.03.2021, all other details in all the relevant documents are correct and there is no discrepancy. Thus, the error noticed is insignificant and not of any consequence for invoking the power conferred under section 129 of the Act to impose tax and penalty.
• The Hon’ble High Court held that only a minor penalty, as prescribed in the circular, should be imposed in the present case and the imposition of tax and penalty by issuing the order in GST MOV-09 is perverse and illegal.

The Hon’ble High Court with the findings quashed the impugned order issued in GST MOV-09 and directed to reconsider the same in view of the circular and the observations of the Court.  Further, the respondents were directed to pass fresh orders after granting opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner.

To read the complete judgment 2022 Taxo.online 371