Typographical or clerical error in e-way bill is not a ground for imposition of penalty

Last updated: 28 February 2024
Quick Summary
The Allahabad High Court has ruled that minor typographical or clerical errors on an e-way bill should not result in a penalty, especially when the goods are accompanied by most of the required documentation. The court emphasised that an intention to evade tax is crucial for imposing penalties under the CGST Act. If supporting documents are provided and the errors are clearly accidental, a presumption of tax evasion cannot be made, and penalties should not be levied.

Court :
Allahabad High Court

Brief :
The Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Hawkins Cookers Ltd. v. State of UP [Writ Tax No. 739 of 2020 dated February 12, 2024] set aside the penalty errors and held that, typographical or clerical error in e-way bill is not a ground for imposition of penalty when most of the required documents are accompanied with the goods supplied. 

Citation :
Writ Tax No. 739 of 2020 dated February 12, 2024

Daily Limit Reached

You have reached your daily limit of 2 Free Judgements

Subscribe to CCI PRO for unlimited access

Why Upgrade to CCI PRO?
  • No Ads
  • WhatsApp Broadcasts
  • Daily E-Newsletter
  • Unlimited Judgements Access
BEST VALUE
2 YEAR PLAN
3,499
(Inclusive of GST)
1 YEAR PLAN
1,999
(Inclusive of GST)
View all CCI PRO benfits

Already a PRO member? Login here for an ad-free experience.

 

Bimal Jain
Published in GST
Views : 332
Share Report Abuse
Comments


Recent Judgments :

  1. SC Landmark Ruling: Mechanical Invocation of Fraud Cannot Extend Limitation under Section 74 of the CGST Act
  2. CESTAT Sets Aside ₹60 Crore Service Tax Demand: Best-Judgment Assessment Cannot Be Based on Guesswork
  3. CESTAT: Excess Service Tax Paid by Mistake Is a Deposit — Refund Not Barred by Section 11B Limitation
  4. CESTAT Denies Service Tax Exemption on Rent to Educational Institution for Lack of Evidence
  5. CESTAT Upholds Customs Duty Demand on Undervaluation of Imported Goods Based on Chinese Customs Documents
  6. IGST Paid Under a Wrong Head to be Adjusted Against CGST/SGST Liability Before Any Recovery of Tax Interest or Penalty
  7. Assessee entitled to fresh opportunity of hearing where adjudicating authority ignored reply filed to DRC-01A intimation
  8. Typographical Error in the SCN Cannot Be a Shield for the Assessee Who Participated in the Proceedings Without Raising Any Objection
  9. Penalty on partners under Section 122(1A) of the CGST Act upheld where complicity in fake invoicing and hawala-linked ITC fraud stands established
  10. Forest Development Tax Demand, Collection and Refund Subject to Final Outcome of Pending Cases

View More Judgments »


Trending Online Classes

view all classess

CCI Pro
Meet our CAclubindia PRO Members
Pro Member Dinesh KotwaniDinesh KotwaniPro Member Narasimha MurthyNarasimha MurthyPro Member Jagdeep KaurJagdeep KaurPro Member Dhananjay PatilDhananjay PatilPro Member Swarna GurumurthySwarna Gurumurthy
Subscribe to Pro
Join an elite circle of professionals

Browse by Category