2020 (12) TMI 945 - HC - GST

Detention of goods alongwith the vehicle - goods detained by the respondent for the reason that the transportation of the goods was not accompanied by a valid e-way bill - Section 129(3) of the GST Act - HELD THAT - Taking note of the request of counsel for the petitioner for permission to clear the goods and the vehicle on furnishing a bank guarantee for the amount demanded in Ext.P3, the writ petition is disposed off by directing that if the petitioner furnishes a bank guarantee for the amount demanded in Ext.P3 notice, then the respondent shall release the goods and the vehicle to the petitioner, and thereafter proceed to adjudicate the matter, after hearing the petitioner, under Section 129(3) of the GST Act.

Summary

Issues Involved:
Detention of goods and vehicle due to lack of valid e-way bill.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Detention of Goods and Vehicle:
The petitioner approached the court aggrieved by the detention notice (Ext.P3) issued by the respondent due to the absence of a valid e-way bill accompanying the transportation of goods. The court found that the detention was justified based on this reason. However, considering the request of the petitioner's counsel, the court directed that upon furnishing a bank guarantee for the amount demanded in Ext.P3, the respondent should release the goods and the vehicle to the petitioner. This decision was made under Section 129(3) of the GST Act.

2. Bank Guarantee and Clearance of Goods:
The court's judgment allowed the petitioner to clear the goods and the vehicle by providing a bank guarantee for the amount specified in the detention notice. Once the bank guarantee is furnished, the respondent is obligated to release the goods and the vehicle to the petitioner. It was further directed that the respondent should proceed to adjudicate the matter under Section 129(3) of the GST Act after hearing the petitioner.

3. Communication and Compliance:
The court instructed the learned Government Pleader to convey the essence of the judgment to the respondent. This communication was aimed at facilitating the swift clearance of the goods and the vehicle upon compliance with the conditions set forth in the judgment. Additionally, the petitioner was mandated to present a copy of the writ petition along with a copy of the judgment to the respondents for further necessary actions.

In conclusion, the court upheld the detention of the goods and the vehicle due to the absence of a valid e-way bill but provided a pathway for the petitioner to secure their release by furnishing a bank guarantee. The judgment emphasized compliance with the conditions outlined under the GST Act for the adjudication of the matter, ensuring a fair process moving forward.