Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 TMI Notes - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • Benami Property
  • Bill
  • Central Excise
  • Companies Law
  • Customs
  • DGFT
  • FEMA
  • GST
  • GST - States
  • IBC
  • Income Tax
  • Indian Laws
  • Money Laundering
  • SEBI
  • SEZ
  • Service Tax
  • VAT / Sales Tax
Types:
---- All Types ----
  • ---- All Types ----
  • Act Rules
  • Case Laws
  • Circulars
  • Manuals
  • News
  • Notifications
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Jurisdictional Prerequisites for Initiating Reassessment u/s 148: Non-Depoist of TDS by the Employer
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Revisiting the Scope of "Record" u/s 263: Embracing Subsequent Records
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Interpreting "Record": Revisiting the Scope of Revision Powers u/s 264 and Rectification of Mistake ...
    The Doctrine of Natural Justice in GST Proceedings: A Case Study on Show Cause Notice u/s 74"
    Input Tax Credit (ITC) and the Concept of "Plant" under GST: Supreme Court
    Case LawsCustoms
    Inordinate Delay in Adjudication: High Court's Stance on Quashing Show Cause Notices
    Case LawsCustoms
    Inordinate Delay in Adjudication: Upholding the Principles of Natural Justice
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Supreme Court Upholds Validity of Re-Assessment Notices Issued During COVID-19 Lockdown
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Unraveling the Mineral Rights Regime: The Supreme Court's Landmark Judgment
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Navigating the Faceless Assessment Regime: A Judicial Perspective
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Evidentiary Value of Statements Recorded During Income Tax Surveys: A Judicial Analysis
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Faceless Assessment: Ensuring Compliance with Statutory Provisions
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Faceless Assessment Mechanism: Jurisdictional Limits in Income Tax Proceedings
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Reassessment Notices for AY 2013-14: Upholding the Doctrine of Limitation
    Principles of Tax Fairness and Mens Rea: Quashes Penalty for Mere Technical Errors
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Decoding the Mandatory Timelines: A Thorough Examination of the Income Tax Assessment Order Nullific...
    Expiry of E-Way Bill AND Mens Rea: Technical Violation Alone Insufficient for Penalty Imposition
    Maintainability of Appeals: High Court Upholds Strict Interpretation of Limitation Provisions in GST...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Stay of Tax Demand: Interpreting the Discretionary Power u/s 220(6) of the Income Tax Act
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Interpreting "Technical Services" under Tax Treaties: A Comprehensive Analysis
❯❯
MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder

No Folders have been created

    +

    Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

    NOTE:

    Notes
    Showing Results for :
    Reset Filters
    Results Found:
    Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Jurisdictional prerequisite: notice in the name of a deceased person invalidates reassessment initiation under Section 148.
    A notice under Section 148 issued in the name of a deceased person is a jurisdictional defect because a valid notice to the correct person is a condition precedent to reopening an assessment; legal representatives have no statutory duty to intimate death; where salary tax has been deducted at source, reassessment cannot be pursued against the deceased or their representatives, and employer non-deposit of TDS does not create an outstanding demand against the assessee or their legal representatives.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Revisional power: Commissioner may consider subsequent records available at time of examination in tax proceedings.
    The Court construed the Commissioner's revisional power to permit consideration of all materials relating to the proceeding that are available at the time of his examination, including documents and valuation reports that came on the file after the assessment order; the Explanation to the provision was read as clarificatory, giving an inclusive meaning to "record" rather than restricting it to what the Assessing Officer had when passing the assessment.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Revision powers under section 264: Commissioner must consider expanded record and rehear revision petitions on merits.
    The Court held that the Commissioner must consider a revision petition on its merits and that the term record in revision proceedings extends beyond the return and assessment order to include material from other sources and prior assessments. It emphasised consistency in treatment of continuing transactions and required the Principal Commissioner to take into account all relevant materials, identify any apparent mistakes, afford a personal hearing, and pass a reasoned order within a short timeframe.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Natural justice in tax proceedings: show cause notices must allege fraud or concealment before enhanced recovery is invoked.
    The court quashed the enhanced-provision show cause notice for failing to allege the essential elements of fraud, willful misstatement, or suppression of facts and held that the enhanced regime may be invoked only when the adjudicating authority is prima facie satisfied of those elements and records that satisfaction in the notice; absent such express allegations the proceedings are without jurisdiction though fresh proceedings may be initiated with a proper notice.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Plant classification under GST: functionality test determines ITC eligibility for buildings serving special technical requirements.
    The expression plant or machinery in Section 17(5)(d) of the CGST Act must be interpreted by reference to functionality rather than by equating it with the statutory definition of "plant and machinery." A building qualifies as a plant for ITC purposes if, on the facts, it was planned and constructed to serve the assessee's special technical or operational requirements. The functionality test is fact-specific and requires case-by-case analysis of the building's role in the assessee's business.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Inordinate delay in adjudication bars further proceedings on stale show cause notices absent a reasonable explanation.
    The court found the delay from 2008 to 2021 inordinate and unexplained, concluding the respondents did not provide a reasonable explanation; the delayed transfer to the call book without intimation breached statutory intimation requirements, and established precedent limits reliance on higher authority to excuse gross unexplained delays in adjudication of show cause notices.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Inordinate delay in adjudication undermines procedural fairness and bars continuation of prolonged, unexplained proceedings.
    The court found that prolonged, unexplained delay in adjudicating a show cause notice breached procedural fairness and natural justice, causing irretrievable prejudice by impairing evidence preservation and business planning. Delay attributable to the revenue authorities, contrary to Tribunal directions for timely disposal, rendered continuance of proceedings unsustainable and emphasized the necessity of justifying delay and ensuring timely adjudication.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Pandemic relief legislation upheld: re-assessment notices issued during lockdown remain valid despite later procedural rule.
    The court interpreted the pandemic relief legislation as providing comprehensive relief that extended to procedural obligations in force at the time of issuance, not confined solely to extensions of time. It applied the principle that statutes operate prospectively and concluded the later-introduced procedural provision does not apply retrospectively to invalidate earlier-issued re-assessment notices, limiting its analysis to the validity of issuance and not the merits of re-assessment proceedings.
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Central legislative competence over mineral regulation affirmed; royalties characterised as compensation for resource depletion, limiting state levies.
    The Court concluded that the central legislative framework occupies the field of mineral regulation and that royalties are compensation for depletion of state-owned natural resources, not conventional taxes; consequently the Centre may impose such levies while States remain constrained from imposing royalties in the nature of compensation that would encroach on the Centre's exclusive regulatory domain.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Faceless assessment mechanism requires reassessment steps to follow a centralized faceless procedure, otherwise territorial officer lacks jurisdiction.
    The Scheme framed under the enabling provision must be read to include preliminary proceedings linked to reassessment, so that reassessment initiation and related steps follow the faceless mechanism; concurrent exercise of territorial and faceless functions would undermine the Scheme's purpose and render steps taken outside the faceless protocol inconsistent with the statutory framework.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Evidentiary value of survey statements: survey disclosures lack conclusive weight and require independent corroboration.
    Statements recorded during a tax survey are permissive and not taken on oath, so they are not conclusive evidence by themselves; they cannot be treated as inherently incriminating material to justify reopening assessments or making additions without independent corroboration, and must be recorded free of coercion in line with administrative instructions and judicial precedents.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Faceless assessment jurisdiction: JAO lacked authority under the statutory faceless procedure, invalidating improperly issued notices.
    The court determined that reassessment notices and related proceedings were inconsistent with the statutory faceless assessment framework because they were issued without following the prescribed allocation of jurisdiction and procedural sequence under the faceless mechanism; administrative orders purportedly exempting cases were not read to displace the statutory requirements and earlier precedent interpreting the faceless provisions was applied.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Faceless Assessment: statutory scheme governs jurisdiction and extends to central and international taxation proceedings.
    The court analysed Section 151A read with Sections 144B and 148A and held that administrative instructions dated March 31, 2021 and September 6, 2021 issued under section 119 apply only to assessment orders and do not extend to proceedings under Sections 148A and 148; those instructions cannot be read into the scheme notified on March 29, 2022. The mandatory faceless procedure under Sections 144B and 151A applies to notices and proceedings, including central charges and international taxation charges, and notices issued outside that mechanism fall outside the statutory jurisdictional framework.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Doctrine of limitation prevents revival of lapsed reassessment powers; administrative instructions cannot "travel back in time."
    The court held that when the right to reopen assessment had already lapsed under the pre amended limitation regime, subsequent amendments or administrative instructions could not revive that right; administrative attempts to "travel back in time" and extend limitation were invalid, assessees retain the defence of limitation, and pandemic era notifications did not cover years whose limitation had already expired.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Mens rea requirement in tax penalties: technical errors without intent cannot justify penalty imposition under GST compliance.
    Requirement of mens rea for imposition of tax penalties is central where e Way Bill compliance is questioned. Mere procedural or timing inconsistencies, without evidence of intent to evade tax and where valid tax invoices accompany the goods and tax has been charged, do not justify penal action. Authorities must establish culpable intent with cogent reasoning and comply with procedural and natural justice safeguards before imposing penalties.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Mandatory timelines under Section 144C require assessments to be completed within the prescribed month after DRP direction, else invalid.
    Once the DRP framed directions, the Assessing Officer was obliged to complete the assessment in conformity with those directions within one month from the end of the month in which the DRP's direction was served; service by uploading the DRP directive on the ITBA portal constitutes valid service for computing that period. The procedure does not envisage further involvement of the Transfer Pricing Officer once the DRP's direction is issued and an order under the transfer pricing provision has been remitted to the AO.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Mens rea requirement: technical expiry of an e way bill alone cannot justify a tax penalty without intent to evade.
    The court held that a purely technical lapse in E Way Bill formalities - where goods were otherwise covered by two e invoices and two E Way Bills and there was no dispute on consignor, consignee or goods - does not demonstrate the mens rea necessary to impose a penalty under the tax penal provision; authorities' focus on the expired E Way Bill alone was legally insufficient given documentary explanations and absence of intent to evade tax.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Exclusion of Limitation Act: GST Act's specific appellate time limits operate as a self contained code, barring general extensions.
    The court analysed whether the GST Act's appellate limitation regime operates as a complete code excluding the general Limitation Act. It applied the principle that fiscal statutes with detailed procedural and temporal rules are to be strictly construed, treating the special statute's limitation provision as implying exclusion of the Limitation Act's extension mechanism, and emphasised policy aims of expeditious dispute resolution, revenue certainty and administrative finality.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Assessing Officer discretion in granting stay of tax demand cannot be rigidly constrained by administrative OMs, requiring case specific consideration.
    The Assessing Officer's discretionary power under section 220(6) to grant stay of tax demand is not fettered by CBDT Office Memorandums; those OMs are administrative guidelines and do not mandate a uniform pre deposit. The AO must consider prima facie case, likelihood of success, and undue hardship and may require a higher, lower or no deposit depending on case specific facts. Administrative adjustment of refunds without considering a pending stay application was held arbitrary and the matter was remitted for reconsideration applying these principles.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Technical services interpretation requires specialized expertise and a demonstrable link to payments for withholding tax consequences.
    Interpretation of technical services under the India Ireland DTAA requires the application or transfer of specialized knowledge, skill or expertise; incidental training or assistance enabling a reseller to market standard software does not meet that threshold. The Reseller Agreement did not contemplate technology transfer or bespoke solutions, payments were tied to reseller net revenue, and the record lacked material linking remittances to customized technical services. Authorities must establish an evidentiary and contractual nexus between payments and provision of specialized technical services before applying withholding tax under the treaty.

    TMI Notes

    Back

    All TMI Notes

    Showing Results for :
    Reset Filters
      No Records Found

      TMI Notes

      Back

      All TMI Notes

      whatsappJoin Channel
      Showing Results for : Reset Filters

      E-Way Bill Requirements Under Rule 138: GST E-Way Bill Framework for Movement of Goods, Transit Documents and Validity

      26 June, 2026

      Contents
      Acts
      Rules & Regulations
      Summary
      Note

      Note

      -

      Bookmark

      Print

      Print

      This is a neutral professional article.

      Rule 138 Information to be furnished prior to commencement of movement of goods and generation of e-way bill.

      Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017

      At a Glance

      The e-way bill framework is built around Rule 138 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, which requires prior electronic information for movement of goods in specified cases and links that requirement to documentary control, transporter responsibility, validity, cancellation, and transit safeguards. The core threshold is the consignment value exceeding fifty thousand rupees, subject to the stated exceptions and special regimes.

      TopicCore ruleCompliance significance
      TriggerMovement of goods of consignment value exceeding fifty thousand rupees in relation to a supply, for reasons other than supply, or due to inward supply from an unregistered personPrior e-way bill compliance is mandatory unless an exception applies
      Who generatesRegistered person, transporter on authorisation, e-commerce operator or courier agency in specified cases, or transporter where the consignor or consignee has not generated itResponsibility may shift according to the mode and parties involved
      DocumentsInvoice, bill of supply or delivery challan; e-way bill number or copy; in some cases bill of entry or RFID-linked detailsDocuments are the primary proof of lawful movement
      Validity and cancellationValidity depends on distance and cargo type; cancellation is possible within twenty-four hours if goods are not moved or not moved as declaredControls the life cycle of an e-way bill and its misuse
      Special regimeRule 138F of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 governs notified intra-State movement of gold, precious stones and similar goodsState-specific compliance overlay for selected high-value goods
      EnforcementSection 129 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 provides for detention, seizure and penalty in case of contraventionNon-compliance can result in immediate transit consequences

      Background & Context

      The e-way bill mechanism operates as a transit-control system under the GST framework. It functions alongside Section 68 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, which empowers the Government to require the person in charge of a conveyance carrying goods above the prescribed value to carry such documents and devices as may be prescribed, and to produce them for verification when intercepted.

      Rule 138 gives practical content to that statutory power. It prescribes when information must be furnished before movement begins, who may furnish it, how Part A and Part B of FORM GST EWB-01 operate, and when FORM GST EWB-02 may be used for consolidated movement. The rule is therefore not merely a formality: it is the documentary basis on which lawful movement is demonstrated during transit.

      The rule also works in tandem with Rule 55 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, which permits a delivery challan in lieu of invoice for specified movements, including goods moved for job work or for reasons other than by way of supply. Where a delivery challan is used, Rule 55(3) requires that the movement be declared as specified in Rule 138.

      A further safeguard is embedded in Rule 138A of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, which states what the person in charge of a conveyance must carry and how verification may be simplified or substituted in appropriate cases. This provision is essential because e-way bill compliance is ultimately judged in transit, not merely at the time of generation.

      For certain high-value intra-State movements of gold, precious stones and similar goods, Rule 138F creates a special regime where a State or Union territory Commissioner mandates furnishing of information. That special rule is relevant because it shows that the e-way bill structure is not uniform in every factual setting; specific commodities may attract an added compliance layer.

      Key Issues / Provisions

      • When does e-way bill generation become mandatory under Rule 138?
      • Who bears the responsibility to furnish Part A and Part B information?
      • What documents must travel with the goods under Rule 138A?
      • How do validity, cancellation and transfer of conveyance operate?
      • What are the exceptions where no e-way bill is required?
      • What is the legal effect of non-compliance in transit?
      • How does the special Rule 138F regime operate for selected intra-State movements?

      Detailed Analysis

      Rule 138 begins with the main trigger. Every registered person who causes movement of goods of consignment value exceeding fifty thousand rupees, whether in relation to a supply, for reasons other than supply, or due to inward supply from an unregistered person, must, before commencement of movement, furnish information relating to the goods in Part A of FORM GST EWB-01 electronically. The rule further states that a unique number is generated on the common portal once the information is furnished.

      The expression consignment value is defined in the Explanation to Rule 138. It means the value determined under section 15, as declared in the invoice, bill of supply or delivery challan issued for the consignment, and it includes central tax, State or Union territory tax, integrated tax and cess charged, if any. The rule also states that where one invoice covers both exempt and taxable goods, the value of exempt supply of goods is excluded. This definition is important because the threshold is not applied on a bare commercial price alone; it is tied to the statutory valuation framework.

      The first proviso to Rule 138(1) allows a transporter, on authorisation from the registered person, to furnish Part A. The second proviso allows an e-commerce operator or courier agency, on authorisation from the consignor, to furnish Part A where the goods are transported through such operator or agency. These provisos matter because the rule recognises that the practical logistics of movement may be handled by intermediaries, but the legal responsibility remains anchored to an authorised compliance pathway.

      The third proviso to Rule 138(1) creates a special rule for principal-to-job-worker movement. Where goods are sent by a principal located in one State or Union territory to a job worker located in another State or Union territory, the e-way bill must be generated either by the principal or the job worker, if registered, irrespective of the value of the consignment. The fourth proviso separately covers handicraft goods transported inter-State by a person exempted from registration under clauses (i) and (ii) of section 24; in such cases the person must generate the e-way bill irrespective of value.

      Rule 138(2) deals with movement by the registered person as consignor or the recipient as consignee, whether in own conveyance, hired conveyance or public conveyance, by road. In that case, the person concerned generates FORM GST EWB-01 electronically after furnishing information in Part B. Rule 138(2A) extends the scheme to railways, air and vessel. The registered supplier or recipient generates the e-way bill and may furnish Part B either before or after commencement of movement, but where transport is by railway, the railways shall not deliver the goods unless the required e-way bill is produced at the time of delivery.

      Rule 138(3) addresses the common transporter scenario. If the e-way bill is not generated under sub-rule (2) and the goods are handed over to a transporter for road transport, the registered person must furnish transporter details on the common portal and the transporter generates the e-way bill on that basis. Two practical qualifiers follow from the text. First, the registered person or transporter may choose to generate and carry the e-way bill even if the consignment value is less than fifty thousand rupees. Second, where movement is caused by an unregistered person, the person or the transporter may, at their option, generate the e-way bill in FORM GST EWB-01.

      Part B is central to road movement. Explanation 2 to Rule 138(3) provides that the e-way bill shall not be valid for movement of goods by road unless the information in Part B of FORM GST EWB-01 has been furnished, except in the specified cases covered by the third proviso to sub-rule (3) and the proviso to sub-rule (5). This is a major compliance safeguard because it prevents a partially filled e-way bill from being treated as complete.

      The rule also covers special logistical situations. Where the goods are transported for a distance of up to fifty kilometres within the State or Union territory from the place of business of the consignor to the place of business of the transporter for further transportation, the supplier, recipient or transporter may not furnish the conveyance details in Part B. Likewise, where goods are transferred from one conveyance to another, the consignor, recipient or transporter must update the conveyance details before transfer and further movement, subject to the fifty-kilometre local movement exception from the transporter's place of business to the consignee's place of business.

      Rule 138(5A) permits assignment of the e-way bill number to another registered or enrolled transporter for updating Part B for further movement of the consignment. The proviso is important: once the conveyance details have been updated by a transporter in Part B, the consignor or recipient who furnished Part A cannot assign the number to another transporter. This prevents repeated reassignment after operational control has already shifted.

      Rule 138(6) recognises consolidated movement. Where multiple consignments are intended to be transported in one conveyance, the transporter may indicate the serial numbers of the e-way bills for each consignment and generate FORM GST EWB-02 on the common portal prior to movement. This is a practical facility, but it does not replace the need for individual e-way bills where the rule requires them.

      Rule 138(7) is the transporter-generated fallback. Where neither consignor nor consignee has generated FORM GST EWB-01 and the aggregate of the consignment value of goods in the conveyance exceeds fifty thousand rupees, the transporter shall generate FORM GST EWB-01 on the basis of the invoice, bill of supply or delivery challan, as the case may be, and may also generate FORM GST EWB-02. This provision ensures that the movement is not left without an e-way bill merely because the primary parties did not act first.

      The rule also links the e-way bill data to return compliance. Rule 138(8) states that Part A information is made available to the registered supplier on the common portal and may be used for furnishing details in FORM GSTR-1. Where the information is furnished by an unregistered supplier or recipient, electronic intimation is to be given if mobile number or e-mail is available. This creates a reconciliation trail between transport documentation and outward supply reporting.

      Cancellation is addressed in Rule 138(9). If an e-way bill has been generated but goods are not transported, or are not transported as per the details furnished, the e-way bill may be cancelled electronically within twenty-four hours of generation. The rule also states that cancellation is not available if the e-way bill has been verified in transit under rule 138B. In the current text, the unique number generated under sub-rule (1) is valid for fifteen days for updation of Part B.

      Validity is governed by Rule 138(10). For goods other than over-dimensional cargo and multimodal shipment involving at least one leg by ship, the validity is one day for up to two hundred kilometres and one additional day for every additional two hundred kilometres or part thereof. For over-dimensional cargo and the specified multimodal shipment, the validity is one day for up to twenty kilometres and one additional day for every further twenty kilometres or part thereof. The Commissioner may extend validity by notification for specified categories of goods, and in exceptional circumstances, including trans-shipment, the transporter may extend validity after updating Part B, if required. The rule also states that the validity may be extended within eight hours from the time of expiry.

      Rule 138(11) and (12) provide an important transactional safeguard. The details of the e-way bill are made available to the supplier or recipient, as the case may be, on the common portal, and the supplier or recipient must communicate acceptance or rejection of the consignment. If no communication is made within seventy-two hours of the details being made available or by the time of delivery, whichever is earlier, acceptance is deemed. This protects the registered recipient from silent burden while also preventing indefinite uncertainty for the consignor.

      Rule 138(13) gives the e-way bill nationwide effect: an e-way bill generated under the rule, or under the corresponding rule of any State or Union territory, is valid in every State and Union territory. That feature is essential in a destination-oriented transport regime because it prevents the need for fresh transit documentation at each border.

      Rule 138(14) contains the non-applicability carve-out. No e-way bill is required where the goods are specified in the Annexure, transported by a non-motorised conveyance, moved from customs port or airport-linked locations to an inland container depot or container freight station for customs clearance, moved within notified local areas, or are among the specified exempt or excluded categories. The rule also excludes alcoholic liquor for human consumption, petroleum crude, high speed diesel, motor spirit, natural gas and aviation turbine fuel, supply treated as no supply under Schedule III, goods under customs bond or customs supervision/seal, transit cargo to or from Nepal or Bhutan, movement by defence formations, transport by rail of goods where the consignor is the Central Government, State Government or local authority, empty cargo containers, and short movement up to twenty kilometres to and from a weighbridge subject to a delivery challan under Rule 55. The separately listed Annexure includes, among others, LPG for household and NDEC customers, PDS kerosene, postal baggage, pearls and precious stones, jewellery, currency, used personal and household effects, and coral.

      Rule 138A complements Rule 138 by specifying what must be carried by the person in charge of a conveyance. The person must carry the invoice or bill of supply or delivery challan, as the case may be, and either a copy of the e-way bill in physical form, the e-way bill number in electronic form, or a form mapped to RFID where notified. In case of imported goods, a copy of the bill of entry must also be carried, and the bill of entry number and date must be indicated in Part A of FORM GST EWB-01. The rule also allows the Commissioner to require certain transporters to obtain a unique RFID device and map the e-way bill to it.

      Rule 138A further recognises that, where invoice is issued in the QR code with embedded IRN format under Rule 48, the QR code may be produced electronically in lieu of the physical tax invoice, and Part A of FORM GST EWB-01 may be auto-populated from FORM GST INV-1. This is a documentary safeguard because it aligns invoice verification with e-way bill data rather than treating them as isolated documents.

      For a special class of goods, Rule 138F creates an intra-State compliance system for goods specified against serial numbers 4 and 5 of the Annexure to Rule 138(14), namely pearls, precious stones, precious metals and jewellery-related items. The rule applies only where the Commissioner of State tax or Union territory tax mandates furnishing of information and the consignment value exceeds such amount, not below rupees two lakhs, as may be notified in consultation with the jurisdictional central tax authority. In such a case, every registered person causing intra-State movement of the specified goods must furnish Part A before commencement of movement and a unique number is generated. Part B is not required for that special category, and the provisions of Rule 138(10), (11) and (12) and Rules 138A to 138E apply mutatis mutandis. The rule also permits e-commerce operator or courier agency authorisation and provides a cancellation window of twenty-four hours, subject to transit verification limitations.

      Enforcement flows through Section 129. Where goods are transported or stored in transit in contravention of the Act or the rules, the goods, conveyance and related documents are liable to detention or seizure. Release follows payment of the prescribed penalty or furnishing of security. Where the owner comes forward, the penalty is equal to two hundred per cent of the tax payable on such goods; for exempted goods, it is two per cent of the value of goods or twenty-five thousand rupees, whichever is less. Where the owner does not come forward, the penalty is fifty per cent of the value of the goods or two hundred per cent of the tax payable, whichever is higher; for exempted goods, it is five per cent of the value of goods or twenty-five thousand rupees, whichever is less. The proper officer must issue notice within seven days of detention or seizure, pass an order within seven days of service of notice, and give an opportunity of hearing. If the amount is not paid within fifteen days from receipt of the order, the goods or conveyance may be sold or otherwise disposed of to recover the penalty.

      Practical Implications

      • Before movement begins, identify whether the trigger is supply, movement for other reasons, inward supply from an unregistered person, or a special category such as job work or handicraft movement.
      • Ensure the correct document is chosen at the outset: invoice, bill of supply or delivery challan under Rule 55, as the case may be.
      • Check whether Part A alone is enough at the planning stage, or whether Part B must be completed before road movement becomes valid.
      • Use transporter authorisation carefully, because responsibility may shift to the transporter for filing or continuation of Part B.
      • Keep the person in charge of the conveyance equipped with the invoice or challan and the e-way bill copy, number, or permitted electronic substitute under Rule 138A.
      • For rail, air and vessel movement, remember the separate mechanics under Rule 138(2A), including the railways' obligation not to deliver without production of the required e-way bill.
      • Use the cancellation facility within twenty-four hours only where the goods are not moved or are not moved as declared, and only if transit verification has not occurred.
      • Track validity by distance and cargo type, especially where over-dimensional cargo or multimodal shipment involving ship transport is involved.
      • Where gold, precious stones or jewellery are moved intra-State in a notified regime, verify whether Rule 138F applies and whether the notified threshold has been crossed.
      • Do not overlook the penalty and detention consequences under Section 129, because documentary defects in transit can escalate quickly into seizure and monetary exposure.

      Key Takeaways

      • Rule 138 is the core e-way bill provision and the central compliance gateway for movement of goods above the prescribed threshold.
      • The system is document-led: Part A, Part B, the correct invoice or challan, and the conveyance details all play distinct roles.
      • Part B is especially critical for road movement, because an e-way bill is not valid for road transport unless Part B is furnished, subject to the stated exceptions.
      • Rule 138A and Rule 55 are practical companions to Rule 138, because they determine what the transporter carries and when delivery challans may replace invoices.
      • Rule 138F introduces a special compliance regime for notified intra-State movement of precious goods with a higher value threshold and limited procedural variation.
      • Section 68 authorises inspection, while Section 129 supplies the enforcement consequence; together they make e-way bill compliance a substantive transit obligation rather than a clerical formality.

       


      Full Text:

      Rule 138 Information to be furnished prior to commencement of movement of goods and generation of e-way bill.

      Topics

      ActsIncome Tax