Section 129 of CGST Act, 2017 — Goods in Transit — In the instant case, the authority has found a mismatch between the delivery challan and the e-way bill and detained the goods.
The petitioner's counsel has also contended that the petitioner had been transferring the stock from one point of its business to another, for its use. Therefore, he is not liable to pay any tax. Thus, by the same reckoning, Section 129 does not apply.
Held that—I hold that the Department's demand on the petitioner to comply with Section 129(1)(a) cannot be faulted. At any rate, the Department's insisting on both the penalty and tax covering all the set-top boxes cannot be sustained. To be specific, the petitioner has already shown in the delivery challan 200 set-top boxes and mentioned its value as well. So for the remaining boxes, that is 600, the cost was not reflected. Subject to further adjudication of the issue before the State Tax Officer, the petitioner could provide a bank guarantee and personal bond under Section 129(1)(a) for the amount to be confined to the 600 set-top boxes. Asianet Digital Network Private Ltd. Vs. The Assistant State Tax Officer  6 TAXLOK.COM 46 (Ker)