Detention of goods under GST fails where invoice details match and no tax evasion intent is shown.

Where goods carried in a vehicle tallied with the invoices in quantity and weight, the broad description and HSN classification were undisputed, and no intention to evade tax was shown, detention under Section 129 of the CGST Act was not justified. The inspecting authority could not rely on size or specification details absent from the invoices to infer a discrepancy. On these facts, there was no material basis for penalty, and the detention and penalty orders were unsustainable and liable to be set aside in favour of the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether detention of goods and imposition of penalty under Section 129 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 were justified when the goods carried in the vehicle tallied in quantity and weight with the invoices, the broad description and HSN classification were not disputed, and no intention to evade tax was shown.

Analysis: The goods found during inspection matched the invoices in quantity and weight, and the gross description did not reveal any different product. The inspecting authority went beyond the invoice description by relying on details such as size and specifications not mentioned in the invoices. On the facts, there was no demonstrated discrepancy to support detention, and no material showed an intention to evade payment of tax. The HSN classification also remained undisputed.

Conclusion: Section 129 could not be invoked, and the detention and penalty were unsustainable; the orders of the authorities were liable to be set aside in favour of the assessee.

---