GSTAT Rejects GST Penalty Based Only on Driver Statement
In short
GSTAT said tax officials cannot rely only on a driver’s unverified statement to impose a penalty. The goods matched the invoice and the e-way bill.
This matters because paperwork that lines up with the goods can outweigh a weak statement. The report does not say who made the statement or what happened next.
What the reporting says
GSTAT ruled that a GST penalty cannot stand merely on an unverified driver’s statement about the loading point when the goods match the invoice and e-way bill. The publisher summary says the case was decided under Section 129 of the CGST/UPGST Act. The immediate effect is that documentary consistency weakens the penalty case, but the reporting does not say who the parties were or whether the order was appealed.
Why it matters
GSTAT held that a Section 129 penalty under the CGST/UPGST Act cannot be sustained solely on an unverified driver’s statement about the loading point when the goods match the invoice and e-way bill. The ruling suggests documentary evidence carried more weight than the disputed statement. It is relevant for transport and compliance cases, but the available reporting does not identify the taxpayer, the vehicle, or the final dispute outcome.