https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=416123 The Court invalidated the impugned order dated 16.02.2019, quashing it due to the unjustified seizure of goods for not having a U.P. e-way bill, which was not mandatory at the time. The Court ruled in favor of the petitioner, directing authorities to refund the deposited amount of Rs. 2,16,000/- along with interest within one month. The interception memo dated 06.01.2018 and consequential orders were also deemed unsustainable and quashed based on the non-applicability of the central e-way bill requirement at the time of interception. en-us Wed, 01 Dec 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 20 Dec 2021 13:24:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=416123 The Court invalidated the impugned order dated 16.02.2019, quashing it due to the unjustified seizure of goods for not having a U.P. e-way bill, which was not mandatory at the time. The Court ruled in favor of the petitioner, directing authorities to refund the deposited amount of Rs. 2,16,000/- along with interest within one month. The interception memo dated 06.01.2018 and consequential orders were also deemed unsustainable and quashed based on the non-applicability of the central e-way bill requirement at the time of interception. Case-Laws GST Wed, 01 Dec 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=416123