GST & logistics
Customer won't pay without an e-way bill — what to check first
"We can't process this invoice, there's no e-way bill against it" is a common stall — sometimes a real compliance problem, sometimes an easy excuse for a customer who's slow for other reasons.
An e-way bill is required for movement of goods where the consignment value exceeds ₹50,000 (some states set a lower threshold for intra-state movement — check your state's notification). Below that, or for a pure services invoice with no goods movement, no e-way bill applies at all — and a customer citing "no e-way bill" on a services invoice or a sub-₹50,000 consignment is simply wrong.
General guidance, not tax advice — thresholds vary by state and by movement type (job work, exhibitions, etc.); confirm against your specific transaction with a GST practitioner if it's a large or unusual invoice.
When it's a real problem
- Goods invoice above ₹50,000, no e-way bill generated at all. This is a genuine compliance gap — during transit, the vehicle can be detained and penalised, and the buyer's own compliance team is right to flag it before releasing payment.
- E-way bill generated with a mismatched value, vehicle number, or party GSTIN. Even if one exists, a mismatch against the actual invoice or delivery can hold up the buyer's own reconciliation.
- E-way bill expired before delivery (validity is tied to distance) and was never extended — technically a lapsed document even though goods moved.
When it's not actually required
- Pure services — consulting, software, AMC/service contracts. No goods movement, no e-way bill, full stop.
- Consignment value at or below the threshold (₹50,000 in most states) for that single invoice/delivery challan.
- Certain exempted goods and movements — specific categories under Rule 138 are excluded regardless of value; worth checking if a customer cites this on a recurring invoice type that's never required one before.
Sorting a real gap from a stall
| Signal | Reads as |
|---|---|
| Customer names the specific field that's wrong (vehicle no., value mismatch) | Real — they've actually checked it against your document |
| Same objection raised on every invoice, including ones under the threshold or for services | Likely a stall, or a compliance team applying a blanket rule incorrectly — worth a direct conversation with their finance contact |
| They ask for the e-way bill number and go quiet once you send it | Real gap, now closed — payment should follow on the agreed date |
| They keep raising new objections after each one is resolved | Not really about the e-way bill — treat it as a cash-flow issue on their side |
What to actually do
- Pull the e-way bill for that specific invoice (or confirm none was needed) before responding — don't argue the general rule, answer the specific document.
- If it's genuinely missing or expired, generate/extend it if the goods haven't already been delivered and closed out; if delivery is already complete, there's often nothing left to regenerate — say so plainly rather than promising a document you can't produce retroactively.
- If the invoice doesn't require one, say why in writing — threshold, services, or exemption — so it's on record and doesn't recur with the same customer next month.
- Watch for the pattern, not just the single invoice. One customer citing e-way bill issues repeatedly, on invoices that clearly don't need one, is a stalling pattern worth escalating past their accounts team.
This is one of several reasons an invoice can sit open that has nothing to do with your customer's cash position — a GST filing gap works the same way; see GSTR-2B mismatches for the other common one.
Upload your Tally outstanding report. We flag bills that look like a dispute rather than slow cash, so you know which calls are worth having and about what.
Run a free health checkNext: GSTR-2B mismatch · Customer paid a newer invoice but not an older one