Wrong PIN Code in E-Way Bill Can’t Trigger GST Seizure When Address Is Correct: HC

The petitioner, a GST-registered proprietorship firm engaged in manufacturing and sale of threshing machinery, supplied goods to M/s Baba Hans Construction Pvt. Ltd. under a “bill to–ship to” transaction. A tax invoice and e-way bill were duly generated, and goods were transported with all requisite documents, including GRs.

During transit, the goods were intercepted and seized on the ground that the place of delivery mentioned in the e-way bill was incorrect. While the “ship to” address correctly mentioned Samastipur, Bihar, the PIN code of Patna was inadvertently entered instead of Samastipur. No discrepancy was found in the nature, quantity, or value of the goods. Proceedings were initiated under Section 129(3) of the GST Act, resulting in seizure and penalty orders, which were challenged in the present writ petition.

Issue Raised: Whether proceedings under Section 129(3) of the GST Act can be sustained when the only discrepancy in the e-way bill is an incorrect PIN code, despite the correct address of the consignee being mentioned and no intent to evade tax being established.

HC’s Ruling: The Allahabad High Court held that the seizure and penalty were wholly unjustified. The Court observed that the transaction was a valid “bill to–ship to” movement supported by all statutory documents and that the incorrect PIN code was a mere clerical error without any mala fide intent.

The Court reiterated that proceedings under Section 129 cannot be initiated where the address of the consignor or consignee is correct and the wrong PIN code does not extend the validity of the e-way bill. The error was held to be protected under Section 126 of the CGST Act as a minor procedural lapse. Hence, the impugned seizure and penalty orders were quashed, and the writ petition was allowed with a direction to refund any amount deposited.

To Read Full Judgment, Download PDF Given Below