https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=435971 The HC held that goods detained for lack of E-Way bill should be valued based on transaction value shown in the tax invoice under Section 15(1) of the Act, not through alternative valuation methods under Section 15(4). The court ruled that petitioner, as owner of goods per established precedent, should be treated under Section 129(1)(a) rather than Section 129(1)(b). The penalty order imposing burden on petitioner was declared bad in law. Court directed respondents to release goods upon petitioner paying 200% of tax payable based on invoice valuation, allowing the petition through remand. en-us Thu, 16 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 14 Apr 2025 15:30:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=435971 The HC held that goods detained for lack of E-Way bill should be valued based on transaction value shown in the tax invoice under Section 15(1) of the Act, not through alternative valuation methods under Section 15(4). The court ruled that petitioner, as owner of goods per established precedent, should be treated under Section 129(1)(a) rather than Section 129(1)(b). The penalty order imposing burden on petitioner was declared bad in law. Court directed respondents to release goods upon petitioner paying 200% of tax payable based on invoice valuation, allowing the petition through remand. Case-Laws GST Thu, 16 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=435971