Section 129/130 of the CGST Act, 2017 – Goods in Transit  –-–- The intra Court appeal filed by the department, which is against the order dated 1st March, 2022, whereby, the learned single Bench held that the detention of the vehicle along with the goods and the demand of tax and penalty not to be justified. The appellant counsel submitted that neither before the appellate authority nor in the pleadings in the writ petition, the respondent had stated anything about the vehicle being broken down or that non-extension of the validity of the e-way bill was not deliberate. When such was the factual position, the learned single Bench ought not to have allowed the writ petition by accepting the said argument, which was placed for the first time when the writ petition was moved before the Court. The counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that the bona fides of the writ petitioner has to be considered and this was taken note of by the learned writ Court. The court observed that the explanation offered by the respondent was an acceptable explanation and a case cannot be made out that there was a deliberate and willful attempt on the part of the respondent / writ petitioner to evade payment of tax so as to justify invocation of the power under Section 129 of the Act. The relief granted by the learned writ Court is fully justified.

Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court dismissed the appeal and the application filed by the department and directed the appellant to process the application for refund filed by the respondent on 7th March, 2022 within a period of two weeks.