Transit detention for missing e-way bill: interim release allowed on compliance, with security permitted instead of cash or bank guarantee.

Goods detained in transit for absence of an e-way bill were ordered to be released on compliance with Section 129(1)(a) of the CGST Act, 2017. The Court noted the argument that where the invoice accompanies the consignment, the consignor or consignee may be treated as the owner of the goods, and that non-availability of an e-way bill by itself does not automatically establish intent to evade tax. Interim protection was granted, and the balance amount could be secured by security other than cash or bank guarantee, subject to the satisfaction of the authority concerned.

---

---

Issues: Whether goods detained in transit for absence of an e-way bill should be released at the interim stage on compliance with Section 129(1)(a) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and whether the petitioner could be permitted to furnish security instead of cash or bank guarantee.

Analysis: The petition concerned detention of goods in transit and a penalty order under Section 129 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The Court noted the petitioner's plea that the consignor or consignee could be treated as the owner of the goods where the invoice accompanied the consignment, and that absence of an e-way bill by itself did not justify an inference of intent to evade tax. The respondents were unable to point out any contrary provision or circular at that stage. The matter was directed to be considered further, while interim protection was granted.

Outcome: The goods were directed to be released forthwith on compliance with Section 129(1)(a) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and the balance amount was permitted to be secured by security other than cash or bank guarantee to the satisfaction of the authority concerned.

---