https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762184 Where the invoice and e-way bill accompanied the consignment and the purchase and onward supply of areca nuts were not disputed, Circular No. 76/50/2018-GST dated 31.12.2018 was treated as binding for determining ownership of goods in transit. On that basis, the consignor or consignee was to be regarded as the owner where the prescribed documents accompanied the goods, so the matter fell within Section 129(1)(a) of the CGST Act read with the IGST Act rather than Section 129(1)(b). The penalty order under Section 129(1)(b) was held illegal and quashed, with a direction to proceed under Section 129(1)(a) and release the goods and vehicle in accordance with law. en-us Thu, 21 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 25 Nov 2024 18:17:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762184 Where the invoice and e-way bill accompanied the consignment and the purchase and onward supply of areca nuts were not disputed, Circular No. 76/50/2018-GST dated 31.12.2018 was treated as binding for determining ownership of goods in transit. On that basis, the consignor or consignee was to be regarded as the owner where the prescribed documents accompanied the goods, so the matter fell within Section 129(1)(a) of the CGST Act read with the IGST Act rather than Section 129(1)(b). The penalty order under Section 129(1)(b) was held illegal and quashed, with a direction to proceed under Section 129(1)(a) and release the goods and vehicle in accordance with law. Case-Laws GST Thu, 21 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762184