Landmark Cars Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India & Anr. (Gujarat High Court)
The Gujarat High Court, in the case of Landmark Cars Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India & Anr., has set aside an order issued by GST authorities that demanded tax and an equivalent penalty for a mismatch in a vehicle number on an e-way bill. The court’s decision hinged on the principle that minor procedural errors, particularly when there is no evidence of intent to evade tax, should not trigger the stringent provisions of Section 129 of the GST Act.
Landmark Cars Pvt. Ltd., a distributor of Mercedes-Benz cars, had dispatched a vehicle from its head office in Ahmedabad, Gujarat, to its branch in Thane, Maharashtra. The transport was a stock transfer and was accompanied by an e-way bill that correctly listed the car’s chassis number. However, the original truck carrying the car suffered a breakdown, and the transporter arranged for a replacement truck.
During a routine check on January 11, 2020, authorities stopped the replacement truck. While the physical verification report (Form GST MOV-4) confirmed no discrepancy in the car and its documents, a detention order (Form GST MOV-6) was issued solely because the truck number on the e-way bill did not match the replacement vehicle. The authorities argued that this constituted a contravention of the GST Act, making the e-way bill an invalid document.
