Section 129 of the CGST Act, 2017—Goods in Transit —The petitioner challenged the detention order dated 06.06.2019 and penalty notice dated 06.06.2019 on the ground of jurisdiction of respondent in seizing the consignment of goods, which were coming from Panipat to Lucknow. On 06.06.2019, the respondent has passed (MOV-06) detention order under Section 129 (1) and also issued penalty notice (MOV-07) under Section 129 (3) of the Act. The petitioners submitted that no seizure can be made on the ground of the technical glitch and unintentional procedural lapse as the consignment was duly supported by all the documents. The E-Way Bill was successfully downloaded and duly accompanied along with the vehicle and the goods and it cannot be alleged that there was any intention to evade the payment of tax. The respondent submitted that final order has been passed under the provisions of Act and against the said order, the petitioners have got a statutory remedy of appeal under Section 107.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court dismissed the petition on the ground that the final order has been passed, against which petitioners have got a statutory remedy of appeal.—Shiv Enterprises Thru. Employee Gaurav Kumar & Anr. Vs. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Institutional Finance, Lucknow & Ors. [2019] 14 TAXLOK.COM 030 (Allahabad)