Vehicles with expired e-way bills cannot be seized when transaction genuineness is established between registered GST dealers

The Tripura HC ruled that vehicles carrying goods with expired e-way bills should not be seized if the transaction is between registered GST dealers and genuineness is not in doubt. The court held that such vehicles should be permitted to continue transit, with the check gate officer taking an undertaking from the buyer or seller and informing the respective assessing officers. The court emphasized that hindering goods movement obstructs national development. The petitioner was directed to submit an undertaking to the check gate officer for release of the vehicle and goods.

---

---

Issues:
1. Detention and seizure of vehicle and goods due to expired e-way bill.
2. Impediment on free-flow of goods and services within the Union of India.
3. Legal obligations of transporter and buyer regarding extension of e-way bill.
4. Authority's discretion in seizing goods and vehicle when e-way bill expires.
5. Consideration of genuineness of transaction and necessity of seizure.
6. Balance between transportation of goods and taxation events.
7. Impact on business and necessity to reconsider e-way bill time fixation.
8. Disposal of writ petition with directions for release of vehicle and goods.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner, engaged in selling construction machinery, filed a writ petition seeking release of a vehicle and goods detained due to an expired e-way bill. The vehicle faced technical issues, leading to detention at the entry point into the State of Tripura.
2. The petitioner argued that the seizure hindered the free-flow of goods and services within India, emphasizing that the transaction was between registered dealers and any delay in transit was unwarranted.
3. The Government Advocate contended that the transporter and buyer should have requested an extension for the e-way bill before its expiry, justifying the authority's decision to stop the vehicle and seize the goods.
4. The Court noted previous instances of similar detentions but emphasized the need to encourage free-flow of goods and services for national development. It questioned the necessity of seizing goods when the transaction's genuineness was not in doubt.
5. Considering the transaction between registered dealers and the absence of doubts, the Court ruled that vehicles carrying such goods should be allowed to continue transit, with the assessing officer informed for necessary compliance steps by the buyer or seller.
6. The judgment stressed the importance of balancing goods transportation and taxation events, suggesting that seized goods should be released upon submission of an undertaking or bond by the buyer or seller, with actions initiated for non-compliance.
7. Highlighting the impact on business due to detentions, the Court urged the rule-making authority to reconsider the requirement of fixing time in e-way bills for smoother operations.
8. Ultimately, the writ petition was disposed of, directing the petitioner to submit an undertaking before the check gate officer for the release of the vehicle and goods, with assessing officers informed for further actions against non-compliant dealers.

---