https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443613 The dispute concerned whether detention and penalty could be sustained under the CGST Act where the key factual issue was whether the vehicle had actually commenced movement before interception. The Calcutta HC noted that the appellate authority had not fully examined the conflicting material on the timing of interception, the e-way bill, and the parking receipt. Because these factual questions were central to the applicability of Sections 68 and 129 and had not been addressed in appeal, the matter was remitted for fresh consideration after hearing all interested parties and reviewing the relevant documents. The appellate authority was directed to decide the matter afresh in accordance with law. en-us Mon, 31 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 21 Apr 2025 11:18:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443613 The dispute concerned whether detention and penalty could be sustained under the CGST Act where the key factual issue was whether the vehicle had actually commenced movement before interception. The Calcutta HC noted that the appellate authority had not fully examined the conflicting material on the timing of interception, the e-way bill, and the parking receipt. Because these factual questions were central to the applicability of Sections 68 and 129 and had not been addressed in appeal, the matter was remitted for fresh consideration after hearing all interested parties and reviewing the relevant documents. The appellate authority was directed to decide the matter afresh in accordance with law. Case-Laws GST Mon, 31 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443613