Uttam Electric Store Vs State of U.P. And 2 Others (Allahabad High Court)
human error in Address in GST e-way bill does not imply tax evasion: HC quashes penalty order
In the case of Uttam Electric Store Vs State of U.P. And 2 Others, the Allahabad High Court has set aside a penalty order related to a GST e-way bill error. The petitioner, Uttam Electric Store, challenged two orders: one from August 21, 2019, and another from September 30, 2020, which imposed penalties for discrepancies in the e-way bill.
The issue arose when Uttam Electric Store, engaged in selling electrical goods, sent a consignment to M/s Udit Engineers, Aligarh. However, the e-way bill mistakenly listed the delivery place as “Chandpur (UP)” instead of Aligarh. The goods were intercepted, and a penalty was imposed under Section 129 of the UPGST Act, 2017.
The petitioner argued that the address error was a mere human mistake and that all other documents, including the tax invoice and e-way bill, were accurate and in compliance. They contended that there was no discrepancy in the quality or quantity of the goods.
The authorities argued that the error in the e-way bill indicated non-compliance with the GST Act, leading to the imposition of a penalty. However, the High Court noted that there was no evidence or finding that the petitioner had any intent to evade taxes. The court cited previous judgments, including Nancy Trading Company Vs. State of U.P. and Shyam Sel & Power Limited Vs. State of U.P., which stressed that without proof of intention to evade tax (mens rea), a penalty under Section 129(3) could not be justified.
