Saumya Through Its Partner Vs Union 0f India And 3 Others (Allahabad High Court)
In a ruling providing relief to businesses facing penalties for minor discrepancies in GST e-way bills, the Allahabad High Court has quashed the seizure of goods and imposition of penalty on Saumya Through Its Partner. The court held that a mere technical error in mentioning the place of shipment in the e-way bill, without any intention to evade tax, does not justify such punitive action.
The case involved a consignment of goods being transported to Himachal Pradesh by Saumya on June 5, 2023, with a valid tax invoice and e-way bill. The vehicle was intercepted and seized near Mathura on June 6, 2023. The basis for the seizure was a statement from the truck driver, who indicated that the goods were loaded from Nagpur, whereas the accompanying documents, including the e-way bill, stated Chandrapur (Maharashtra) as the dispatch location.
Assessee’s Defense:
Saumya, through its partner, argued that while its principal place of business is Chandrapur, it also has an additional place of business in Nagpur, from where the goods were indeed loaded. The discrepancy in the e-way bill, mentioning Chandrapur instead of Nagpur, was attributed to a “technical error” during the generation of the e-way bill. The firm contended that this minor error did not alter the nature of the transaction or indicate any attempt to evade tax. Crucially, no discrepancies were found regarding the quantity, quality, or other details of the goods mentioned in the e-way bill and tax invoice.
