• Kandivali West Mumbai 400067, India
  • 022 39167251
  • support@email.com
April 27, 2021

Maximum Penalty of Rs. 1000 shall be levied in case of Minor clerical error in E-way Bill

by Mahesh Mara in GST, Legal Court Judgement

Maximum Penalty of Rs. 1000 shall be levied in case of Minor clerical error in E-way Bill

E Way Bill is an Electronic Way bill for movement of goods to be generated on the eWay Bill Portal. A GST registered person cannot transport goods in a vehicle whose value exceeds Rs. 50,000 (Single Invoice/bill/delivery challan) without an e-way bill that is generated on ewaybillgst.gov.in. Alternatively, Eway bill can also be generated or cancelled through SMS, Android App and by site-to-site integration through API. When an eway bill is generated, a unique E way Bill Number (EBN) is allocated and is available to the supplier, recipient, and the transporter.

Eway bill must be generated when there is a movement of goods of more than Rs 50,000 in value to or from a registered person. A Registered person or the transporter may choose to generate and carry eway bill even if the value of goods is less than Rs 50,000. In case goods are moved without generating a valid e-way bill, the authorities may impose a penalty of 10,000 INR or amount of tax sought to be evaded, whichever is higher.

Fact of the case

Petitioner is a proprietary concern and is engaged in the business of manufacturing aluminium utensils and its unit is located at Agartala. The petitioner purchased certain aluminium products from Hindalco Industries Ltd. which is a Government of India company for a sum of Rs.19,46,014/- and would be supplied from Kolkata to be transported to Agartala by road. Invoice was generated by the Hindalco on 25.10.2018 which showed that the goods would be transported from Howrah west, Kolkata and would be delivered at the petitioner‟s unit at A.D Nagar Industrial Estate, Agartala. Hindalco also issued a Test Certificate and Packing Slip of the goods under transportation which gave full breakup of the number of items, their weight, chemical compositions as also the number of the truck in which the goods would be transported. In terms of the provisions of the GST Act and Rules thereunder, the consignor also generated the E-way bill from the official portal of the State agencies on 25.10.2018. According to the petitioner, due to a clerical error the distance from the place of origin to the ultimate destination i.e. from Howrah to Agartala, was shown as 470 Kms. instead of actual distance which was 1470 Kms. The petitioner would point out that as per sub-rule (10) of Rule 138 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, a transporter would have time of one day to transport the goods for every 100 Kms. of distance require to be travelled. The system thus automatically generated the validity period of five days for the E-way bill since the distance, as noted earlier, was erroneously shown as 470 Kms. instead of 1470 Kms.

The goods arrived at Tripura border at Churaibari Check Post on 05.11.2018. The inspecting agency intercepted the goods and issued a memo of detention on the ground that the transporter had not produced valid E-way bill. On 5.11.2018 itself, a show cause notice was issued by the Inspector of State Taxes calling upon the petitioner to pay total GST of Rs.2,96,850/- and penalty of Rs.8,24,582/- under sub-clauses (a) and (b) of sub-section (1) of Section 129 of the CGST Act, 2017. Officer required the petitioner to appear before him on 19.11.2018 at 10.45 a.m. Strangely, having issued notice to the petitioner to appear on 19.11.2018, the Inspector of State Tax passed the impugned order on 05.11.2018 itself and confirmed the principal tax demand with penalties as noted.

Issue of the case

In this case the petitioner has challenged on the ground that validity of the E-way bill had expired on account of a clerical error which would not result into any tax liability. The penalty obviously was wrongly demanded.

Observation by the Court

Having thus heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused documents on record, it emerges indisputably that the defect of the goods in transporting without valid E-way bill was as a result of a minor oversight and a clerical error. Things which are not seriously disputed. In view of such undisputable facts, court do not think that the Inspector of State Tax had the power to demand GST with penalty. Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, has issued a circular dated 14th September, 2018 clarify the manner in which such clerical errors would be dealt with. As per the circular in case the goods are accompanied by an invoice as also an E-way bill, proceedings under Section 129 of the CGST Act, 2017 should not be initiated if there is a error of one or two digits in a document number mentioned in the E-way bill. In such a situation, at best, penalty of Rs.500 & 1000/- under State and Central GST may be collected under Section 125 of the Act.

In view of such facts, we do not find that it is a fit case where we should relegate the petitioner to appeal remedy, more importantly when the order passed by the Inspector of State Tax suffered from gross irregularity of no hearing been granted to the petitioner. As noted, the said authority issued a notice of personal hearing making it returnable on 19.11.2018, long before that however, on 05.11.2018 i.e. a date on which he issued the notice, he passed a separate order confirming the demand of tax with penalty. This was wholly impermissible since he does not treat this order as a tentative demand but as a mandatory demand. In the result, impugned order dated 05.11.2018 is set aside. Petition is disposed of accordingly. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.


Hence, the high court has set aside the order of authority dated 05/11/2018 and decided the case in favour of the taxpayer by leving a penalty of Rs. 1000 as per as per section 125 of the CGST act.

Read the full order from below


Enter your email address:

Subscribe to faceless complainces

Please follow and like us:
Pin Share
Follow by Email