https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=394266 The court emphasized the mandatory nature of Rule 138 of CGST Rules, requiring registered persons to update E-way bills for consignments exceeding Rs. 50,000. The petitioner, a Goods Transport Agency, challenged the detention of their vehicle and goods by the 2nd respondent for not updating Part B of the E-way bill. The court ordered the release of goods on a bank guarantee and directed the 2nd respondent to promptly finalize the adjudication proceedings, considering all contentions raised by the petitioner. The court also discussed the relevance of Rule 138(7) exempting E-way bill generation for consignments below Rs. 50,000, instructing the 2nd respondent to consider these aspects during adjudication. en-us Tue, 04 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 08 Mar 2022 14:48:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=394266 The court emphasized the mandatory nature of Rule 138 of CGST Rules, requiring registered persons to update E-way bills for consignments exceeding Rs. 50,000. The petitioner, a Goods Transport Agency, challenged the detention of their vehicle and goods by the 2nd respondent for not updating Part B of the E-way bill. The court ordered the release of goods on a bank guarantee and directed the 2nd respondent to promptly finalize the adjudication proceedings, considering all contentions raised by the petitioner. The court also discussed the relevance of Rule 138(7) exempting E-way bill generation for consignments below Rs. 50,000, instructing the 2nd respondent to consider these aspects during adjudication. Case-Laws GST Tue, 04 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=394266