https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249541 Section 51 of the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 draws a distinction between detention cases covered by clause (a), where goods and vehicle may be released on a bond with sureties, and clause (b), where a bank guarantee may be required. The commentary explains that Rule 64B requires prior electronic submission of transit information for specified goods, but where the vehicle was intercepted within Ludhiana before crossing a check-post or information collection centre, the facts were treated as falling within section 51(6)(a). On that basis, release on a surety bond was permissible and insistence on a bank guarantee was not justified. en-us Thu, 13 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 16 Jul 2014 12:36:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249541 Section 51 of the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 draws a distinction between detention cases covered by clause (a), where goods and vehicle may be released on a bond with sureties, and clause (b), where a bank guarantee may be required. The commentary explains that Rule 64B requires prior electronic submission of transit information for specified goods, but where the vehicle was intercepted within Ludhiana before crossing a check-post or information collection centre, the facts were treated as falling within section 51(6)(a). On that basis, release on a surety bond was permissible and insistence on a bank guarantee was not justified. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 13 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249541