https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428260 Goods seized solely for non-accompaniment by an e-way bill could not be detained where the e-way bill requirement was inapplicable during the relevant period. The Court held that, once that legal position applied, the foundation for seizure disappeared and the detention order was unsustainable. The impugned order under Section 129(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 was quashed, and the petitioner obtained relief from the seizure and consequential proceedings. en-us Mon, 26 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 05 Apr 2025 12:38:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428260 Goods seized solely for non-accompaniment by an e-way bill could not be detained where the e-way bill requirement was inapplicable during the relevant period. The Court held that, once that legal position applied, the foundation for seizure disappeared and the detention order was unsustainable. The impugned order under Section 129(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 was quashed, and the petitioner obtained relief from the seizure and consequential proceedings. Case-Laws GST Mon, 26 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428260