GST detention cannot rest on procedural lapses alone where goods moved under a genuine delivery challan and no taxable supply existed.

Goods moved on a delivery challan for a non-taxable self-use transfer could not be detained merely for non-uploading of Form KER-1 or non-compliance with Rules 55 and 138 of the Kerala GST Rules. The GST scheme taxes only supplies for consideration and specified deemed supplies, and detention or confiscation under Sections 129 and 130 requires contravention with intent to evade tax. Where the genuineness of the delivery challan is undisputed and the transaction is not a taxable supply, procedural lapse alone does not justify detention. The detention and consequential communication were therefore without jurisdiction and liable to be quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether goods transported on delivery challan, where the underlying transaction did not constitute a taxable supply, could be detained merely for non-uploading of Form KER-1 and non-compliance with Rules 55 and 138 of the Kerala Goods and Services Tax Rules.

Analysis: The GST scheme treats only supplies made for consideration and the specified deemed supplies as taxable supply. Goods moved by a taxable person for its own use to consumption sites, without consideration, do not fall within the scope of supply. On a combined reading of Sections 129 and 130, detention in transit is contemplated when the goods are liable to confiscation, and confiscation is attracted where there is contravention with intent to evade tax. Mere failure to comply with the procedural requirements of Rules 55 and 138, when the genuineness of the delivery challan is not disputed and the transaction is not a taxable supply, cannot by itself justify detention.

Conclusion: Detention of the goods was without jurisdiction and the impugned detention and consequential communication were liable to be quashed.

---