TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the detained goods and vehicles were liable to be released on the petitioner furnishing a bank guarantee for the tax and penalty due and a bond for the value of the goods in the prescribed form.
Analysis: The detention arose from an alleged wrong declaration in the e-way bill. Following an earlier Division Bench decision on an identical issue, the Court held that release could be ordered on suitable security. The prescribed safeguard for the value of the goods was the bond under Rule 140(1) of the CGST Rules, along with a bank guarantee for the tax and penalty component.
Conclusion: The petitioner was entitled to release of the goods and vehicles on furnishing a bank guarantee and the prescribed bond.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
