Section 129 of the CGST Act, 2017--- Goods in Transit -------The petitioner challenged the order dated 8.4.2021 whereby the appeal of the petitioner has been rejected and the order dated 16.10.2019 passed under Section 129 (3) was confirmed. The Counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner’s goods were intercepted on 9.10.2019 and three bags of Betel Nut Product were found without tax invoice. A show cause notice was issued to the petitioner and the petitioner submitted tax invoice. Since the value of the goods was less than Rs. 50,000/-, therefore, e-way bill was not generated. The respondent submitted that only one e-way bill was issued for 87 bags but with regard to three more bags no e-way bill and tax invoice was issued. The court observed that if the dealer has submitted the tax invoice along with the reply to the SCN, no adverse inference can be drawn. It is well settled that the quasi judicial authority while exercising of its statutory powers must have to act fairly with open mind in the proceedings. The person who is subjected to the show cause notice must get an impression that the reply to the show cause notice will be not an empty ceremony and he will mere knock his head against the impenetrable wall. Once the tax invoice was submitted the value of which was less than fifty thousand and as per Rule 138, there was no requirement for generating of e-way bill to the said transaction. The present case is a glaring example of the mischievous of the State Authorities which needs to be checked at the end of the State Government immediately.

Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court allowed the writ petition with cost of Rs. 20,000/- (twenty thousand) payable to the petitioner. The cost shall be paid within a period of one month. Further quashed the orders dated 8.4.2021 and order dated 16.10.2019.