Taxpayer Can't Be Mulcted With Unjust Penalty Due To Minor Discrepancy Of PIN Code In GST Registration: Madras High Court
The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court has held that the taxpayer cannot be mulcted with an unjust penalty due to a minor discrepancy in the PIN code in the GST registration, and the tax invoices are to be construed as a minor violation of the provisions of the respective GST enactments.The bench of Justice C. Saravanan has observed that the imposition of a penalty for technical venial breach...
The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court has held that the taxpayer cannot be mulcted with an unjust penalty due to a minor discrepancy in the PIN code in the GST registration, and the tax invoices are to be construed as a minor violation of the provisions of the respective GST enactments.
The bench of Justice C. Saravanan has observed that the imposition of a penalty for technical venial breach of the provisions or the minor discrepancy in the variance in the address in the tax invoices and the e-way bill would not justify the penalty under Section 129(5) of the GST enactments.
The petitioner/assessee has assailed the order by which the penalty of Rs. 8,74,036 was imposed on the consignment carried in conveyance. The supplier from Bellari District has supplied the consignment of steel pipes to Tuticorin, namely H.V. Cargo Logistics. The goods that were carried in the aforesaid conveyance, which accompanied tax invoices as well as an e-way bill, However, there was a discrepancy between the PIN code of the petitioner in the tax invoices and in the e-way bill.
Pursuant to the detention of the vehicle, since the consignment was urgently required, the penalty that was imposed was also paid by the petitioner, which was acknowledged by the respondent in Form GST DRC 03 dated September 7, 2023.
The assessee contended that the address given in the E-Way Bill and the VAT registration obtained under Rule 9(1) of the Karnataka VAT Rules, 2005, are one and the same. There is a minor discrepancy in so far as the PIN code, which mistake has been carried forward by the petitioner in the E-Way Bill as the GST Registration bears the address at PIN code 583123.
The department contended that the petitioner had voluntarily paid the amount on 06.09.2023, which has been duly acknowledged in Form GST DRC 03 on 07.09.2023. The Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed.
The court has held that although the petitioner has come long after the order was passed, the philosophy under the GST enactments is not to levy an unjust tax and burden on the assessee, who is otherwise regular in paying tax and complies with the law.
The court directed the department to either refund the amount paid by the petitioner or allow the petitioner to take credit in their Electronic Cash Register or Electronic Cash for adjustment towards future tax liability of the petitioner.
Counsel For Appellant: Derrick Sam
Counsel For Respondent: R.Suresh Kumar
Case Title: M/s.Jindal Pipes Limited Versus The Deputy State Tax Officer (Int)
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 314
Case No.: W.P.(MD) No.17211 of 2024 and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.14833 & 14834 of 2024