A well-known phenomenon of motor control is the end-state comfort effect, which describes the tendency to plan grasping actions in such a way that they end in a comfortable posture. However, insights into neural mechanisms underlying different sequences of goal-directed grasping are lacking. Sixteen right-handed participants were presented with different sequences of a bar-transport task by using a priming paradigm and were asked to judge the top color of the bar. Primes represented either comfortable (overhand grip; OH) or uncomfortable (underhand grip; UH) initial grasp postures, and targets depicted either comfortable (thumb up; TU) or uncomfortable (thumb down; TD) final postures of this grasping action. Different action sequences (OH-TU, OH-TD, UH-TU, UH-TD) were represented by the prime-target pairs reflecting either a physically possible or a physically impossible movement. Behaviorally, we found shorter reaction times to the OH-TU than to the OH-TD sequence (p < .05; Cohen’s d = 0.16). Additionally, reaction times to the UH-TU sequence were shorter compared to the UH-TD sequence (p < .05; Cohen’s d = 0.15). Neurophysiologically, the targets were found to evoke a fronto-central distributed P300 component with a significantly smaller amplitude in the UH-TU than in the UH-TD sequences (p < .05; Cohen’s d = 0.35). Importantly, the effect was only found for the physically possible actions. Our findings, which are supported by behavioral and neurophysiological measures, are consistent with the end-state comfort effect. The results suggest the generation of expectancy violations by the incongruity in representing an action sequence (spatio-temporal order/physical possibility).