Goods in Transit — In the instant case reason for detention is that “on verification of documents accompanied, it is noticed that the consignor and consignee are two different entity with different GSTINs. They have made stock transfer between them on support of delivery challan and e-way bill which is against the provisions of Kerala GST/CGST Act and Rules made thereunder.” Challenge raised against detention was mainly based on a contention that the transaction in question is not a supply of goods attracting liability of any tax and that it is a permissible transaction contemplated under provisions of the CGST Act. It was specifically contended that, under Rule 55 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules 2017(CG & ST Rules, for short), an invoice need not be generated wherever there is transportation of goods for any reasons other than by way of supply. But the learned Single Judge found that, the appellant could not be able to establish that the transaction between the parties was not a sale and that the ownership of the goods was not transferred to the consignee. It was found that the definition of supply contained in Section 7 of the Act is not confined to transactions of sale alone, but includes transfer for other purposes also. Hence it is found that the detention cannot be termed as unjustified. Held that— The 1st respondent shall pass an order as contemplated under sub-section (3) of 129, only on taking into consideration of the objections if any raised by the petitioner to the extent that the transit was not in contravention of the provisions of the Act and the Rules. — Daiwik Motors Vs. The Assistant State Tax Officer, The Deputy Commissioner of State Tax, The Assessing Authority Central Jurisdiction [2019] 19 TAXLOK.COM 125 (Kerala)