Order Date – 14 February 2025

Parties: M/S Zhuzoor Infratech Private Limited Vs Additional Commissioner Grade 2 and Another

Facts –

• The Petitioner,  M/S Zhuzoor Infratech Private Limited, placed the order with Rungta Mines Limited, Jharkhand, with instructions to bill in favor of the petitioner but deliver the shipment directly to the New Delhi buyer.
• The shipment was intercepted during transit, and the authorities initiated penalty proceedings due to a discrepancy in the shipping address. The authorities imposed a penalty under Section 129 of the GST Act, alleging that the goods were not accompanied by proper documents.

Issue –

• Whether the discrepancy in the shipping address between the e-tax invoice and e-way bill constitutes a valid ground for detention and penalty under the GST Act?

Order –

• The Single Bench of Hon’ble High Court observed that at the time of generating the e-tax invoice, the system has auto-populated the e-way bill after taking details from the e- tax invoice. Once the auto populated details was fetched by the system from e-tax invoice created by the GST portal in the e-way bill, no adverse inference can be drawn against the petitioner.
• Further, if the place of shipment is wrongly filled up, then it is merely a technical error provided if no other defect is found in the e-tax invoice as well as e-way bill  in respect of quality or quantity of the goods at the time of physical verification, therefore,  no adverse view  be drawn against the petitioner.
• In the present case, the e-way bill has not been cancelled within its validity, therefore, no adverse view can be taken against the petitioner that if the goods were not intercepted, transaction in question could have escape to assessment.
• Hence it was held that merely on technical ground that in the e-way bill accompanying with the goods in question, the place of shipment has wrongly been mentioned, the seizure or levy of penalty cannot be made.