Security deposit refund for detained goods depends on finality of earlier no-irregularity order and absence of other liability

Refund of a security deposit furnished to secure release of a detained consignment was warranted where an earlier Section 29A inquiry under the KGST Act found no irregularity in the detention and directed refund of the amount. The remaining question was whether that earlier order had attained finality and whether any other liability survived against the petitioner. On that basis, the refund was made conditional on the earlier order having become final and no outstanding liability remaining against the petitioner.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to refund of the security deposit collected for release of the detained consignment, in view of the earlier order holding that there was no irregularity and directing refund.

Analysis: The security deposit had been furnished only for obtaining release of the detained consignment. An enquiry under Section 29A of the KGST Act had already resulted in an order finding that there was no irregularity warranting detention and that the security amount was to be refunded. The only remaining question was whether that order had become final and whether any other liability survived against the petitioner. On that basis, the writ petition was disposed of with a direction to refund the amount if the earlier order had attained finality and no other liability remained.

Conclusion: The petitioner was held entitled to refund of the security deposit, subject to the earlier order having become final and no other liability being due.

---