https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=399873 The adjudicating authority upheld the tax and penalty imposed by the Assistant Commissioner, CGST, rejecting the appellant's arguments regarding tax evasion and double taxation. The detention of goods outside the intended delivery address was deemed legitimate under Section 129(1) of the CGST Act due to documentation discrepancies. The appellant's defense of a subsequent sale in transit was dismissed, as no valid E-way Bill was present at the time of interception. The authority found the appellant's reliance on cited case laws irrelevant to the case's unique circumstances, ultimately denying the appeal and affirming the original order. en-us Fri, 25 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 20 Mar 2025 14:19:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=399873 The adjudicating authority upheld the tax and penalty imposed by the Assistant Commissioner, CGST, rejecting the appellant's arguments regarding tax evasion and double taxation. The detention of goods outside the intended delivery address was deemed legitimate under Section 129(1) of the CGST Act due to documentation discrepancies. The appellant's defense of a subsequent sale in transit was dismissed, as no valid E-way Bill was present at the time of interception. The authority found the appellant's reliance on cited case laws irrelevant to the case's unique circumstances, ultimately denying the appeal and affirming the original order. Case-Laws GST Fri, 25 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=399873