2026-VIL-334-GSTAT-BLR

SGST Tribunal

GST - Penalty under Section 129 of CGST Act, 2017 for mismatch of vehicle number in e-way bill - The consignment accompanied by an e-way bill and a delivery challan was detained since the vehicle in which it was transported differed from the vehicle number in Part B of the e-way bill - Proper officer imposed penalty under Section 129(1)(a) on the ground that Part B was updated with a different vehicle number and valid e-way bills were not produced - Whether invoking Section 129 and levy of penalty is just and proper where the only discrepancy is the vehicle number in Part B of the e-way bill - HELD - The need to prove mens rea depends on the statutory provision and the nature of the contravention. The Apex Court has upheld the requirement of mens rea before invoking Section 129 and the proper officer cannot conclude an intention to evade tax without material. The reasoning of FAA that mens rea is not relevant is rejected - Section 129 is a machinery provision to check evasion of tax and a detention is justified only if there is a contravention in relation to transportation of goods - The e-way bill and the delivery challan contained all the information required under Rule 138 and Rule 55 of the CGST Rules, 2017 and the only discrepancy was the vehicle number in Part B. Furnishing correct conveyance particulars under Rule 138 is a statutory requirement and not an empty formality. However, the nature and extent of the discrepancy cannot by themselves establish an intention to evade tax, and the explanation, the documents and the circumstances must be examined cumulatively. Physical verification revealed no defects, and the authorities relied on no other material to establish an intention to evade tax - The levy of penalty under Section 129 is unwarranted. The order of the FAA is set aside and the appeal is allowed

Create Account



Log In



Forgot Password


Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page



Feedback this page