https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778105 The HC quashed the orders detaining goods and imposing penalties under Section 129(3), finding no evidence of tax evasion where the consignor produced contemporaneous documents explaining delay due to truck breakdown and there was no mismatch in quantity or quality. The court held the authorities failed to record cogent findings rebutting the petitioner's explanation and relied solely on the e-way bill expiry. In light of precedent rejecting detention absent material showing evasion, the impugned orders were set aside and the petition allowed. en-us Thu, 04 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 10 Sep 2025 08:39:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778105 The HC quashed the orders detaining goods and imposing penalties under Section 129(3), finding no evidence of tax evasion where the consignor produced contemporaneous documents explaining delay due to truck breakdown and there was no mismatch in quantity or quality. The court held the authorities failed to record cogent findings rebutting the petitioner's explanation and relied solely on the e-way bill expiry. In light of precedent rejecting detention absent material showing evasion, the impugned orders were set aside and the petition allowed. Case-Laws GST Thu, 04 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778105