2026-VIL-287-GSTAT-AGR
  1. Home
  2. 2026-VIL-287-GSTAT-AGR

SGST Tribunal

GST - Maintainability of the departmental appeal before the Tribunal, Imposition of penalty under Section 129(3) for non-updation of Part-B of the e-way bill - Monetary limit prescribed in the Circular of the Commissioner - The Respondent contended that the amount in dispute was below the monetary limit prescribed in the circular for filing an appeal before the Tribunal, and that the departmental appeal against the order of the FAA setting aside the penalty under Section 129(3) was therefore not maintainable - Whether the departmental appeal is barred by the monetary limit in the Departmental Circular - HELD - The Circular dated 05.07.2024 itself lists exclusions in which the decision to file an appeal is to be taken on merits irrespective of the monetary limit. One such exclusion permits an appeal in any case where, in the opinion of the Commissioner, it is necessary to contest in the interest of justice or revenue. Where the appeal is filed on the basis of such opinion, the opinion of the Commissioner cannot be challenged and the Commissioner is not required to state the grounds or reasons for it - The objection to the maintainability of the appeal is not sustainable and is rejected - Imposition of penalty under Section 129(3) for non-updation of Part-B of the e-way bill - Requirement of intention to evade tax - The vehicle and goods were detained under Section 129(1) and penalty was imposed under Section 129(3) as Part-B of the e-way bill was not updated - The FAA set aside the penalty; Department appeal, contending that furnishing of Part-B is a mandatory and substantive requirement under Rule 138 - Whether penalty under Section 129(3) can be imposed merely on technical errors, or whether intention to evade tax is a sine qua non for invoking Section 129 - HELD - The penalty was imposed solely for violation of the provisions, with no finding of intention to evade tax in the order. The Department had not taken a stand in the grounds of appeal that there was any underlying intention to evade tax. The High Court has repeatedly held that mens rea or intention to evade tax is an essential requirement for imposing penalty under Section 129, particularly where the violation is technical and the transaction is genuine - The transaction was between two bona fide registered traders, and the e-invoice was generated on the portal before the movement of goods, which made all transaction information available and auto-populated the return. No intention to evade tax is therefore established - The order of the FAA quashing the penalty is affirmed and the departmental appeal is dismissed.
Download File

Quick Search

/

Advance Search

GST Resources

/

Gst Rate Finder

Tax Vista

Your Weekly Tax Recap

By Dr. G. Gokul Kishore

Weekly Summary

VIL Video

GST Adjudication & Appeals Reform
By CA Vivek Jalan

Create Account

Security-Code
New Code?

Log In

New User ? Forgot Password ?

Forgot Password

Security-Code
New Code?
Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page

Security-Code
New Code?

Feedback this page

Schedule a Demo

Schedule a demo to know the features and advantages of VILGST portal. Get to know the tips to find the desired results in faster way.

Security-Code
New Code?

Caselaw Request Form (CRF)

Didn’t find what you are searching for? No worries, please give us the following details and VIL will email you the desired Caselaws at the earliest:

Security-Code
New Code?