Section 129 of the CGST Act, 2017—Goods in Transit —-The petitioner challenged the penalty order dated 02.11.2018 passed under Section 129(3) of the Act and the Appellate order. The counsel for petitioner submitted that the goods were dispatched by the cosigner to the consignee through the transporter. The truck which was bringing the goods was changed twice and the orders have been wrongly passed solely on the surmises that Truck No. U.P.-78DT/6036 had already brought the goods and this was the second shipment by the consignee bringing in the goods. The court observed that the authorities had proceeded merely on presumption that the goods were brought by the petitioner using two trucks. There is no material on record to demonstrate that goods were brought twice by the petitioner. The presumption drawn by both the authorities cannot be accepted without there being any material on record.

Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court set aside the orders.