Section 129 of the CGST Act, 2017 — Goods in Transit — The Petitioner, a dealer with registration in the State of Tamil Nadu, had its goods detained here in Kerala. The petitioner insisted that it would pay the bank guarantee and the bond based on its registration in Tamil Nadu, rather than on a temporary registration in Kerala, as suggested by the authorities. In the Review Petition, the petitioner has taken two contentions (i) The methods suggested by the authorities and accepted by this Court have no statutory sanction; and (ii) The judgment, in fact, records that the petitioner's counsel has agreed to the Government Pleader's suggestion, it is factually incorrect.

Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court held that it is, perhaps, an eminent ground of appeal, not that of review. About the second, the judgment stands modified and the last paragraph reads as “Recording the arrangement as suggested by the Government Pleader, I dispose of the Writ Petition.”.— JKB Motors Vs. Union of India Represented by The Finance Secretary, New Delhi, The Commissioner GST And Central Excise, Cochin, Nodal Officer, Cochin And Goods And Services Tax Network, New Delhi [2019] 9 TAXLOK.COM 025 (Ker)