Section 129 of the CGST Act, 2017—Goods in Transit –--- The petitioner prayed for direction to serve a copy of an Order issued under Section 129(3) of the Act and not to invoke the bank guarantee furnished by the petitioner. The respondent Railway Police intercepted and detained gold while in transit on 18.09.219 and produced the goods before the Court, who vide order dated 15.10.2019, directed the seized gold to be returned on furnishing a bank guarantee as security as contemplated under Section 129 of the Act. In the meantime, an adjudication was held on 24.01.2020, and the petitioner alleges that no orders thereon were communicated to him. Since the order has not been served upon the petitioner till date, its right to prefer an appeal under Section 107 of the Act could not be exercised. The respondent submitted that the order was issued on 25.01.2020 and a copy was sent by registered post to the petitioner on 28.01.2020 and was received by the petitioner on 03.02.2020. The dispatch register maintained by the first respondent shows that the order was dispatched to the petitioner and the acknowledgement card evidenced receipt of the order by the petitioner. The court observed that there is no scope for even assuming that the order was not served on the petitioner. Since the petitioner’s right to pursue an appeal cannot be curtailed solely on account of non-receipt of an order or loss of an order, if law otherwise permits him to pursue the appeal, then certainly it is incumbent upon the first respondent to issue a certified copy to the petitioner.

Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court directed the first respondent to issue a certified copy of the order dated 25.01.2020 to the petitioner. On receipt of certified copy, petitioner will be entitled to pursue its statutory remedies in accordance with law. Further, invocation of bank guarantee through letter shall be kept in abeyance and the bank guarantee be kept alive for a period of 60 days from today to enable the petitioner to pursue the statutory remedies.