https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776274 The HC held that the petitioner complied with the statutory requirements under Rule 138A of the CGST Rules by possessing both the invoice and E-way bill during transit. The initiation of proceedings under Section 129 of the CGST Act was based on the alleged failure to produce an invoice from an unregistered dealer, which was not applicable as the goods were transported from the petitioner's registered premises with proper documentation. Disputed factual statements not reflected in the impugned notices were disregarded. Consequently, the HC found the detention proceedings legally unsustainable and quashed the relevant notices and orders. en-us Fri, 25 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 07 Aug 2025 07:04:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776274 The HC held that the petitioner complied with the statutory requirements under Rule 138A of the CGST Rules by possessing both the invoice and E-way bill during transit. The initiation of proceedings under Section 129 of the CGST Act was based on the alleged failure to produce an invoice from an unregistered dealer, which was not applicable as the goods were transported from the petitioner's registered premises with proper documentation. Disputed factual statements not reflected in the impugned notices were disregarded. Consequently, the HC found the detention proceedings legally unsustainable and quashed the relevant notices and orders. Case-Laws GST Fri, 25 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776274