2025 (5) TMI 770 - HC - GST

Levy of penalty u/s 129(3) of the U.P. G.S.T. Act 2017 - part-B of E-way bill was not filled up - HELD THAT - A perusal of the order impugned passed by Assistant Commissioner Sector 5 (Mobile Squad 5) Gautam Buddha Nagar Uttar Pradesh would reveal that except for noticing violation of provisions of Rule 138 on account of non-filling up of part-B of e-way bill not a word has been indicated pertaining to any attempt to evade tax. In view of the series of orders passed by this Court laying down that unless an attempt is made to evade tax and a finding in this regard is recorded mere non-filling of part-B of e-way bill would not attract penalty under Section 129 of the Act the order impugned passed by the respondents cannot be sustained. The order dated 28.04.2025 passed by the Assistant Commissioner Sector 5 (Mobile Squad 5) Gautam Buddha Nagar Uttar Pradesh is set aside - Petition allowed.

Summary

The Allahabad High Court, in a writ petition challenging the penalty imposed under Section 129(3) of the U.P. G.S.T. Act, 2017, held that mere non-filling of part-B of the e-way bill, constituting a violation of Rule 138 of the G.S.T. Rules 2017, does not warrant penalty absent a recorded finding of intention to evade tax. The Court emphasized that "unless an attempt is made to evade tax and a finding in this regard is recorded, mere non-filling of part-B of e-way bill would not attract penalty under Section 129 of the Act." Reliance was placed on the precedent set in M/s Precision Tools India vs. State of U.P., where similar reasoning was adopted. Since the impugned order lacked any indication of tax evasion intent, the penalty was set aside, and the petitioner's bank guarantee was ordered to be returned.