2019 (11) TMI 592 - HC - GST

Detention notice upheld for expired e-way bill under GST Act; consignment release upon bank guarantee.

The court upheld the detention notice under Section 129 of the GST Act due to an expired e-way bill but directed release of the consignment and vehicle ... Detention under Section 129 of the GST Act - expiry of e-way bill - release of goods on furnishing bank guarantee - adjudication under Section 130 of the GST ActDetention under Section 129 of the GST Act - expiry of e-way bill - Detention of the consignment and vehicle was justified on the ground that the e-way bill's validity had expired at the time of detention. - HELD THAT: - The court examined the detention notice (Ext.P4) and found that the sole ground for detention was that the e-way bill accompanying the goods had already expired when the consignment was seized. In view of this factual finding recorded in Ext.P4, the detention could not be characterised as unjustified. The court therefore upheld the validity of the detention based on the expired e-way bill. [Paras 1]Detention could not be said to be unjustified because the e-way bill had expired at the time of detention.Release of goods on furnishing bank guarantee - adjudication under Section 130 of the GST Act - Consignment and vehicle to be released on the petitioner furnishing a bank guarantee for the tax and penalty quantified in Ext.P4; respondents to adjudicate the matter after notice in accordance with Section 130 of the GST Act. - HELD THAT: - Although the detention was sustained, the court exercised its supervisory power to grant interim relief. The petitioner was directed to furnish a bank guarantee covering the tax and penalty amounts quantified in Ext.P4; upon such security being furnished, the respondents were ordered to release the goods and vehicle. The respondents were further directed to proceed with adjudication of the claim after serving notice on the petitioner and following the procedure prescribed under Section 130 of the GST Act. The petitioner was required to produce a copy of the writ petition and the judgment before the respondents to facilitate further action. [Paras 2]Release of consignment and vehicle on furnishing bank guarantee; respondents to adjudicate the issue after notice and in accordance with Section 130 of the GST Act.Final Conclusion: Detention under Section 129 was upheld because the e-way bill had expired; however, the consignment and vehicle are directed to be released on the petitioner furnishing a bank guarantee for the tax and penalty, and the respondents are ordered to adjudicate the matter after notice in accordance with Section 130 of the GST Act. Issues:Detention notice under Section 129 of the GST Act due to expired e-way bill validity.Analysis:The petitioner challenged the Ext.P4 detention notice issued under Section 129 of the GST Act, citing an expired e-way bill as the reason for detention. The court noted that the detention was justified under the circumstances of the expired e-way bill. However, considering the petitioner's plea, the court directed that upon furnishing a bank guarantee for the tax and penalty amount specified in Ext.P4 order, the respondents must release the consignment and the vehicle to the petitioner. Subsequently, the respondents were instructed to proceed with the adjudication process under Section 130 of the GST Act after providing notice to the petitioner and following the prescribed procedure. The petitioner was also required to provide a copy of the writ petition along with the judgment to the respondents for further action.