Section 129 of CGST Act, 2017 — Goods in Transit — In the instant case, the Assistant State Tax Officer intercepted the goods and detained them. On his demand, the vehicle driver showed the invoices and e-way bills meant for intra-state transport i.e. from Ernakulam to Thalassery and Kozhikode. He could not show the e-way bill from Bangalore to Ernakulam.
Held that—If online generation of e-way bill suffices, the Rule would not have insisted on the consignment carrying a copy of the bill or the number in electronic form. At any rate, the issue now concerns only the provisional release and the statute provides an efficacious mechanism for that. Of course, the statutory compliance for the provisional release does visit on the petitioner with certain financial burden, as it has to produce the Bank Guarantee.
The Court should adopt a pragmatic view rather than a pedantic one. True. But in the name of interim orders and in the name of our exercising judicial discretion at the threshold, we cannot afford to chip away at the statutory scheme-especially if the scheme has an economic efficacy - The issues the petitioner raised here are the ones to be considered on merits finally-but not at the threshold and definitely not as a prima facie factor.
Under these circumstances, preserving the petitioner's right to advance all its pleas before the State Tax Officer, I dispose of the writ petition, holding that the authorities will release the goods if the petitioner complies with Section 129(3) of the GST Act. — Carpenters Classics India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Assistant State Tax Officer, State Goods And Service Tax Department, Muthanga, Commission Of State Taxes, Thiruvannathapuram And State Of Kerala, Thiruvananthapuram [2018] 6 TAXLOK.COM 40 (Ker)