TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
Bill-To Ship-To E-Way Bill Compliance, Portal Closure and Transit Controls: GST E-Way Bills: Rule 138, Rule 138A
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Validity and cancellation Rule 138 prescribes distance-linked validity, cancellation within twenty four hours where goods are not transported or are not transported as per the e-way bill, and a separate closure workflow after delivery. Enforcement risk Section 129 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 deals with detention and seizure in transit, while Section 130 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 addresses confiscation where contravention is coupled with intent to evade tax. Special scenarios Circular treatment exists for transporter godowns and for minor discrepancies in e-way bills; judicial decisions supplied with the materials emphasise that technical defects do not, by themselves, establish evasion. Background & Context The e-way bill mechanism is the GST system's operational tool for tracking the movement of goods. It links the commercial document trail with the movement trail, so that tax administration can verify whether goods in transit correspond to the declared invoice, delivery challan or bill of supply. The statutory foundation is Section 68 of the Central Goods And Services Tax Act, 2017, which provides that....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s Generation threshold, consignee data and the structure of the e-way bill Rule 138 begins with the threshold and the core compliance event: before commencement of movement, information relating to the goods must be furnished electronically. The rule also supplies the legal meaning of consignment value. It is the value determined under section 15, declared in the invoice, bill of supply or delivery challan, and it includes central tax, State or Union territory tax, integrated tax and cess, if charged. Where a single invoice covers both exempt and taxable supply, the value of exempt supply is excluded for the purpose of the rule. One of the most important practical consequences of Rule 138 is the role of Part B. The rule states that, where goods are transported by road and the registered person or consignee is responsible for generation, Part B is to be furnished. The explanation further clarifies that the e-way bill is not valid for movement of goods by road unless Part B has been furnished, except for the specific short-distance exceptions built into the rule. This is why Part-B omissions regularly become the subject of interception and dispute. Rule 138 also governs t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ory also introduces a voluntary e-way bill closure facility. The stated object is to enable closure of the e-way bill once delivery of goods is completed. This is a significant workflow addition because it creates a post-delivery administrative step that is separate from generation, modification and cancellation. The closure facility may be used by the supplier, recipient, transporter involved in the transaction, or the driver or other authorised person whose mobile number has been provided for closure. For suppliers, recipients and transporters, the option is available after login under the e-way bill section of the portal. Closure may be performed e-way bill-wise or date-wise. The advisory also provides for mobile-number based closure. A mobile number may be entered at the time of e-way bill generation specifically for closure purposes, and that number may also be updated during vehicle updation, consolidated e-way bill operations, or extension of validity. The Search function on the common portal then displays all active e-way bills linked to the concerned mobile number, enabling closure by the authorised person. Two points are important here. First, closure is voluntar....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....st also maintain the relevant records. Importantly, it says the declaration of additional place of business does not impose any additional compliance burden on the transporter. Detention, minor discrepancies and confiscation The enforcement side of the e-way bill regime begins with Section 129 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The key operative words are that where any person transports goods or stores goods while they are in transit "in contravention of the provisions of this Act or the rules made thereunder", the goods and conveyance are liable to detention or seizure. Release is linked to payment of the specified penalty or furnishing of security. The section also requires notice within seven days of detention or seizure, followed by an order within seven days of service of notice, and it expressly provides that no penalty shall be determined without giving the person concerned an opportunity of being heard. Section 130 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 is the confiscation provision. It applies where contravention is accompanied by intent to evade payment of tax, or where the statutory grounds for confiscation are otherwise met. The distinct....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....LAHABAD HIGH COURT, the order under challenge referred only to non-filling of Part-B of the e-way bill. The court noted that nothing in the order showed any attempt to evade tax. In that context, and in the light of earlier orders of the same court, mere non-filling of Part-B was treated as insufficient to sustain penalty under Section 129. The central principle is that a technical omission, without a finding of tax evasion, does not automatically justify punitive transit action. In 2024 (1) TMI 813 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT, the same underlying problem arose in a slightly different form. The invoice contained vehicle details, the goods corresponded with the invoice, and there was no demonstrated intention to evade tax. The omission of Part-B was therefore treated as a technical error rather than an act of evasion. The court quashed the penalty and appellate orders and directed return of the security. This decision is important because it shows that where the commercial documents substantially align with the movement, the absence of a completed Part-B entry may not, by itself, attract the harsh consequences of detention. In 2024 (1) TMI 282 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT, the issue was ....