Index of Relevent Files CGST Section 129

CIRCULARS

Circular No.	Subject
Circular No. 76/50/2018-GST dt. 31.12.2018 [para 6]	Clarification on certain issues (sale by government departments to unregistered person; leviability of penalty under section 73(11) of the CGST Act; rate of tax in case of debit notes / credit notes issued under section 142(2) of the CGST Act; applicability of notification No. 50/2018-Central Tax; valuation methodology in case of TCS under Income Tax Act and definition of owner of goods) related to GST
Circular No.64/38/2018-GST dt. 14.09.2018	Modification of the procedure for interception of conveyances for inspection of goods in movement, and detention, release and confiscation of such goods and conveyances, as clarified in Circular Nos. 41/15/2018-GST dated 13.04.2018 and 49/23/2018-GST dated 21.06.2018
Circular No.49/23/2018-GST dt. 21.06.2018	Modifications to the procedure for interception of conveyances for inspection of goods in movement, and detention, release and confiscation of such goods and conveyances, as clarified in Circular No. 41/15/2018-GST dated 13.04.2018
Circular No.41/15/2018-GST dt. 13.04.2018	Procedure for interception of conveyances for inspection of goods in movement, and detention, release and confiscation of such goods and conveyances
Circular No.3/3/2017-GST dt. 05.07.2017	Proper officer relating to provisions other than Registration and Composition under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017

COMMUNITY INSIGHTS

Topic		Publish Date
	Gujarat HC Quashes GST Penalty for E-Way Bill Part-B Lapse: Upholding the Core of Natural Justice The Gujarat High Court has once again reinforced the importance of audi alteram partem—the foundational principle of natural justice—while adjudicating GST disputes. In Tractors and Farm Equipment Ltd. v. Union of India [2025(07)LCX0356], the Court set aside a penalty imposed under Section 129 of the CGST Act, 2017, solely on the ground that the order was passed without granting the assessee a meaningful opportunity to be heard. .......... Read More	06.08.2025
	Detention Under Section 129 CGST Not Sustainable for Mere Technical Infractions The Goods and Services Tax (GST) regime, introduced in India in 2017, aimed at simplifying the indirect tax structure and streamlining inter-state trade. However, its implementation has often been fraught with challenges, particularly concerning the interpretation and application of provisions related to the movement of goods. One such provision, Section 129 of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017........... Read More	11.07.2025
	Typographical Error in E-way bill - Should Penalty be Imposed? As we know that before the movement of goods the e-way bill is required to be generated, non generation of e-way bill can lead to a penalty u/s 129 of CGST Act during the transit. However while generating the e-way bill on the e-way bill portal, sometimes the typographical or clerical errors are made like the error in mentioning the distance, error in mentioning the vehicle.................... Read More	17.04.2025
	Unmasking the Fraud: How to Spot and Verify Fake GST Notices Received a GST violation notice? Hold on before you panic-it might not be real. Recently, scammers have ramped up their game by sending fake GST summons that look alarmingly official. These fraudulent notices are designed to trick taxpayers into acting fast-demanding payments or personal information, all while mimicking the real thing. If you've been targeted by one of these scams, you're not alone. The Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs....................... Read More	19.02.2025
	GST Roadblocks: Procedure for Interception of Conveyance With the introduction of the GST regime and the mandatory implementation of the e-way bill, there have been several instances where vehicles transporting goods are detained due to discrepancies in the documentation. This article seeks to outline the key sections and rules that authorize the interception and detention of vehicles, along with the penalties that can be levied on the owners of both the goods and the vehicle................ Read More	01.10.2024

CASE LAW

Authority	One liner
2025(10)LCX0008 Madhya Pradesh High Court Maa Kamakhya Trader	In s.129 quantity disputes, courts can order supervised re-weighment, allow release against BG, and reset appeal limitation from the rectified MOV-9.
2025(09)LCX0127 Allahabad High Court Nippon Tubes Limited	Without Rule 45/55 challan and a valid e-way bill for job-work movement, Section 129 action is sustainable.
2025(07)LCX0380 Allahabad High Court Gaylord Packers India Private Limited	Penalty for minor e-way bill clerical errors, absent intent to evade tax, is unsustainable under Section 129 of the GST Act.
2025(07)LCX0322 Supreme court of India Asp Traders	A reasoned final order under Section 129(3) must be issued even if tax/penalty is paid, to safeguard appeal rights and procedural fairness.
2025(07)LCX0193 Calcutta High Court Hari Rama Constructions @ Moka Ramakrishna	Penalty under Section 129 cannot be imposed for mere technical lapses without tax evasion intent.
2025(07)LCX0140 Allahabad High Court Tirupati Agro Commodities	GST penalty cannot be imposed under Section 129 solely on grounds of misclassification without intent to evade.
2025(07)LCX0081 Calcutta High Court Jageswar Saw	Misdeclaration as an unregistered person was a deliberate attempt to evade tax and the same amounts to penalty under section 129 of CGST Act
2025(06)LCX0467 Madras High Court STP Ltd.	GST penalty proceedings under Section 129 require a speaking order when the penalty is paid under protest and no final adjudication has occurred.
2025(04)LCX0664 Calcutta High Court Pawan Carrying Corporation	Factual disputes over e-way bill errors must be adjudicated by the appellate authority, not under writ jurisdiction.
2025(04)LCX0657 Gujarat High Court Marcowagon Retail Private Limited	No penalty under Section 129(1)(a) can be imposed where tax is not payable on zero-rated export supplies.
2025(04)LCX0468 Allahabad High Court Maa Kamakhya Trader	The court correctly upheld procedural fairness, prohibiting revenue from altering grounds post-verification.
2025(04)LCX0172 Allahabad High Court Lalitpur Power Generation Company Limited	GST penalty is upheld due to invalid and mismatched e-way bills during goods transit as violated Sections 68 and Rule 138 of the GST Act
2025(04)LCX0145 Calcutta High Court Shekhar Kumar @ Shekhar Bagaria	Penalty imposed u/s 129 of the GST Act, 2017on the assessee for not carrying a physical tax invoice and taking a different route is quashed, as there was no evidence of tax evasion
2025(04)LCX0141 Allahabad High Court Aries Agro Limited	GST authorities must issue Form GST MOV-09 i.e. penalty order even if the penalty is paid under protest, to enable the right to appeal.
2025(04)LCX0045 Allahabad High Court B M Computers	Absence of Part B of the e-way bill coupled with discrepancies in the transportation details of the goods imply an intention to evade tax rendering penalty u/s 129(3) CGST Act valid
2025(03)LCX0233 Allahabad High Court Jaya Traders	Seizure can be made even on the ground of under valuation, if under valuation is deliberate for the purpose of avoiding payment of tax or to defeat the provisions of the Act.
2025(03)LCX0088 Allahabad High Court SL Yadav Cranes Private Limited	Penalty imposed due to a typographical error is quashed as the assessee has valid documents for the goods, and authority is directed to release the goods u/s 129(1)(a) of the CGST Act
2025(03)LCX0013 Allahabad High Court Gurunanak Arecanut Traders	Demand Penalty u/s 129(1) & (3) of GST Act is rightly imposed for transporting goods without a mandatory e-way bill, ruling that post-interception generation of the e-way bill does not absolve liability and the discrepancies in goods description and business registration further indicated an intention to evade tax.
2025(02)LCX0296 Allahabad High Court Agarwal Steels	If any deficiency is pointed out in SCN and the same is cured before passing of the detention order and assessee has no intention to evade tax, no penalty u/s 129 can be justified.
2025(02)LCX0068 Allahabad High Court Vishnu Singh	Incorrect invoice number entered in eway bill is minor human error, should not result in seizure and penalty when all other accompanying documents are valid
2025(01)LCX0122 Allahabad High Court Osr Creation	If the requisite documents which were not accompanying with the goods were produced before passing the seizure order and if there were no intention to avoid the legitimate tax the levy of penalty u/s 129 of GST Act was not justified.
2024(11)LCX0192 Allahabad High Court A N Enterprises	Once the fact is settled that HSN Code and rate of tax is similar and assessee would not gain in not mentioning correct description of items or state would loose its legitimate tax, assessee can not be held liable u/s 129 of GST Act.
2024(08)LCX0100 Allahabad High Court Aa Plastics Private Limited	Order seizing goods and levying penalty under Section 129 of the CGST Act is quashed, citing minor breach and absence of intent to evade tax, and instead suggests proceedings under Section 122 of the CGST Act.
2024(07)LCX0525 Allahabad High Court Exide Industries Ltd.	Power of detention as well as seizure can be exercised only when the goods were not accompanying with the genuine documents provided under the Act, which is not disputed in case in hand.
2024(07)LCX0043 Allahabad High Court Vishal Steel Supplier	Detention of goods on the basis that they were not on its normal route is invalid as there is no provision for disclosure of route prior to movement and further no intention to avoid tax.
2024(07)LCX0020 Allahabad High Court Nanhey Mal Munna Lal	Penalty u/s 129(3) GST Act is set aside due to a typographical error of different dates on the E-way Bill and Tax Invoice.
2024(06)LCX0285 Karnataka High Court Transways India Transport	Appeal challenges Penalties and release a seized vehicle over a disputed goods transport route deviation is quashed a sit is fundamental right to conduct business freely.
2024(05)LCX0125 Allahabad High Court Raghuveer Ispat Private Limited	Expired e-way bill from engine failure is a technical violation, not tax evasion; penalty is not warranted under Section 129(3) of CGST Act.
2024(05)LCX0121 Allahabad High Court Axrecycle Private Limited	non filling up of Part 'B' of the e-Way Bill, without any intention to evade tax cannot lead to imposition of penalty u/s129(3) of the Act.
2024(05)LCX0012 Calcutta High Court Maa Amba Builders	Goods intercepted within 24 hours from the expiry of the validity of the e-way bill, including there being no evidence of evasion of tax needs to be released.
2024(04)LCX0599 Allahabad High Court Goverdhan Oil Mill	No GST penalty is leviable under Section 129 for genuine stock transfers lacking tax evasion intent.
2024(04)LCX0478 Allahabad High Court Sangeeta Jain	Error of Dispatch address in E-Way Bill without any intention to evade tax cannot lead to imposition of penalty.
2024(04)LCX0459 Allahabad High Court L.D. Goyal Steels (P) Ltd.	Not just expiry of e-way bill but mens rea to evade tax is essential for imposition of penalty under Sec 129(3) of GST Act.
2024(04)LCX0366 Rajasthan High Court Hindustan Trading Co.	Order u/s 129 (3) CGST Act is unjustified as issue was not absence of e-way bill, but expired e-way bill during transit & heavy penalty for such minor offence is unacceptable.
2024(03)LCX0329 Kerala High Court Shri Coimbatore Jewellers India Private Limited	Belated Writ petition filed by assessee against penalty order passed cannot be entertained.
2024(03)LCX0317 Madras High Court Ganesh Engineering	Assessee is directed to file appeal against order u/s 74 demanding tax, interest and penalty due to duplicate e-way bills, before revenue after payment of 15% of disputed tax amount.
2024(03)LCX0006 Allahabad High Court Ridhi Sidhi Granite And Tiles
2024(02)LCX0304 Allahabad High Court Patil Biotech Private Limited	Penalty u/s 129(3) be cannot be imposed without any proof of intention to evade tax.
2024(02)LCX0119 Calcutta High Court Mohammad Shamasher	Penalty under Section 129 set aside; minor procedural lapse without tax evasion doesn’t warrant 200% penalty.
2024(02)LCX0100 Allahabad High Court Indeutsch Industries Private Limited	Intention to evade tax is sine qua non before imposition of penalty.
2024(02)LCX0061 Allahabad High Court Anchor Health And Beauty Care Private Limited	Impugned orders are arbitrary having levied tax on the petitioner on the goods meant for stock transfer between one branch to another.
2024(02)LCX0050 Allahabad High Court Spirare Energy Private Limited	Technical violation by petitioner without any intention to evade tax cannot lead to imposition of penalty.
2024(02)LCX0049 Allahabad High Court Globe Panel Industries India Private Limited	Technical violation by petitioner without any intention to evade tax cannot lead to imposition of penalty under Section 129(3) of the Act.
2024(02)LCX0043 Allahabad High Court Abilities Pistons And Rings Limited	Technical faut in Non filling up of Part B of the E-Way Bill without any intention to evade tax cannot lead to imposition of penalty.
2024(01)LCX0552 Allahabad High Court Roli Enterprises	Penalty for non-filling Part B of e-Way Bill is unsustainable when there is no intent to evade tax.
2024(01)LCX0494 Allahabad High Court Precision Tools India	Defect in filing e-way bill being purely of technical nature only and without any intention to evade, makes the seizure order illigal and void.
2024(01)LCX0383 Allahabad High Court Shamhu Saran Agarwal And Company	Goods are not to be detained on the ground of under valuation.
2024(01)LCX0277 Allahabad High Court Ashoka P.U. Foam (India) Private Limited	Imposition of penalty is based on the presence of mens rea for tax evasion, and merely a technical error is not sufficient.
2024(01)LCX0045 Allahabad High Court Hindustan Herbal Cosmetics	A typographical error in the e-way bill without any further material to substantiate the intention to evade tax should not and cannot lead to imposition of penalty.
2023(11)LCX0014 Allahabad High Court Sunflag Iron & Steel Co. Ltd.
2023(10)LCX0406 Supreme court of India Vardan Associates Private Limited	Penalty reduced due to absence of intentional evasion; GST demand upheld.
2023(10)LCX0049 Allahabad High Court Vacmet India Ltd.	Proceedings are vitiated when there was no intention to evade payment of tax.
2023(10)LCX0007 Allahabad High Court Shyam Sel & Power Ltd.
2023(10)LCX0006 Allahabad High Court Om Prakash Kuldeep Kumar
2023(09)LCX0337 Madras High Court Tvl.V.V.Iron and Steels	Issuance of notice u/s 129(3) TNGST Act within seven days has to be calculated from the date on which seizure was to be effected and not from the following date.
2023(09)LCX0353 Uttarakhand High Court Prestress Steel LLP	Mere non production of the delivery challan cannot lead to revocation of section 129.
2023(02)LCX0025 Allahabad High Court Varun Beverages Ltd.	The minor discrepancy as to the registration of vehicle in State in the E-way will would not attract proceedings for penalty under Section 129.
2023(02)LCX0025 Allahabad High Court Varun Beverages Ltd.	The minor discrepancy as to the registration of vehicle in State in the E-way will would not attract proceedings for penalty under Section 129.
2022(12)LCX0224 Calcutta High Court Rumki Biswas	Penalty for e-way bill error must hinge on evidence of wilful intent to evade tax, not mere technical lapses.
2022(08)LCX0179 Calcutta High Court Vardan Associates Private Limited	Writ jurisdiction cannot be invoked when penalty under Section 129 is legally and procedurally valid.
2022(08)LCX0063 Karnataka High Court Rajeev Traders	Officer doing detention u/s 129 cannot do confiscation.
2022(04)LCX0151 Gujarat High Court Dhabriya Polywood Limited
2022(03)LCX0289 Madhya Pradesh High Court CREATE CONSULTS	Mistake of wrong mention of name in eway bill is clerical mistake thus, proceeding under Section 129 of GST may not be issued.
2022(03)LCX0001 Calcutta High Court Ashok Kumar Sureka	Delay in e-way bill due to vehicle breakdown not willful; penalty and tax refund allowed.
2022(01)LCX0062 Supreme Court of India Satyam Shivam Papers Pvt. Limited	SC upheld HC order quashing penalty for expired e-way bill; no tax evasion intent found.
2021(07)LCX0188 Kerala High Court VST AND SONS (P) LIMITED, MUTHUKUMAR MEENAKSHY	Used personal vehicles transported post-purchase are exempt from e-way bill; detention without basis unlawful.
2021(06)LCX0015 Telangana High Court Satyam Shivam Papers Pvt. Ltd.	Order u/s 129(3) issued for expiry of E Way bill without any evidence of evasion of tax is set aside
2021(01)LCX0099 Allahabad High Court Anandeshwar Traders
2020(11)LCX0145 Karnataka High Court Hemanth Motors
2020(08)LCX0040 Kerala High Court ABCO TRADES (P) LTD	No detention of goods u/s 129 on ground that e-way bill show consignee as unregistered person.
2020(03)LCX0048 Kerala High Court Hindustan Coca Cola Private Limited	Detention of goods not possible on ground that there is dispute in rate of GST.
2019(05)LCX0035 Punjab and Haryana High Court DSG Papers Private Limited	Detention for expired e-way bill must be adjudicated promptly with opportunity of hearing to taxpayer.
2019(11)LCX0009 Kerala High Court Kannangayathu Metals	Detention of goods solely because driver had opted for a different route was not justified.
2019(08)LCX0055 Patna High Court Ram Charitra Ram Harihar Prasad	As fresh e-way bill generated before passing of detention order, therefore detention order quashed
2019(08)LCX0007 Karnataka High Court Raj Enterprises	Ownership under Section 129 must consider documents and CBIC Circular; penalty clause must align accordingly.
2019(06)LCX0028 Karnataka High Court Sri B.Narasimha Pai	Petitioner directed to appeal as factual disputes over e-way bill errors merit statutory remedy first.
2019(11)LCX0021 Karnataka High Court Bright Road Logistics Pvt. Ltd	Matter remitted to Commissioner (Appeal) to reconsider appeal where appeal was rejected passing a non-speaking order.
2019(03)LCX0045 Allahabad High Court Praveen Kumar Jain	Petition dismissed - court didnot find any ground to interfere in challenged SCN issued u/s 130 for confiscation
2019(11)LCX0005 Kerala High Court Relcon Foundations (P) Ltd	Detaining on ground that GSTR-3B and GSTR-1 had not been filed was not justified.
2019(10)LCX0010 Gujarat High Court S. S. Enterprises	Release of detained goods on depositing amount of tax and penalty subject to the final outcome
2019(08)LCX0004 Gujarat High Court Sree Ram Twistex Private Limited	Release of seized goods and vehicle subject to final outcome of confiscation.
2019(06)LCX0026 Karnataka High Court Kalebudde Logistics	Petitioner must seek interim relief for release of goods in pending appeal under GST law.
2019(04)LCX0026 Gujarat High Court Neuvera Wellness Ventures Pvt Ltd	Detention as Part-B of E-way bill was not generated - Goods being perishable released on against bond
2018(11)LCX0032 Allahabad High Court Timexo Fasteners India Private Ltd.	Goods detained u/s 129 released as the EWB was allowed to expire after the detention of the goods by incorrectly recording the time of interception
2018(11)LCX0033 Allahabad High Court Sunaiba Industries	Goods detained on account of improper invoice in respect of some of the builties
2018(07)LCX0036 Madhya Pradesh High Court Gati Kintetsu Express Pvt. Ltd.	Goods detained for not uploading Part-B of EWB
2018(04)LCX0060 Allahabad High Court VSL Alloys (India) Pvt. Ltd.	Merely of none mentioning of the vehicle no. in Part-B cannot be a ground for seizure of the goods where the goods are transported for a distance of upto 50 kms within the State upto place of transporter
2018(04)LCX0034 Allahabad High Court Ramesh Chand Kannu Mal	WEF 01.02.2018 there was no requirement to download the Transit Declaration Form for inter state movement of goods
2018(04)LCX0035 Allahabad High Court Harley Foods Products Pvt. Ltd	Seizure proceedings quashed as Goods transported from Ahmedabad to be delivered at Meerut accompanying Gujarat EWB not produced at the time of interception
2018(11)LCX0031 Allahabad High Court Shree Mahakali Trading Company	Goods detained released on compliance of section 129(1)(a) as the proper e-.way bill was immediately generated and as such there is no willful or deliberate defiance of any provisions
2018(11)LCX0035 Allahabad High Court Aman Enterprises And Beej Bhandar	Petitioner being the owner of goods detained and having paid entire amount of the value of the goods to the selling dealer allowed to take goods subject to compliance of section 129(1)(a)
2018(11)LCX0037 Allahabad High Court Shah Concast Private Limited	Goods detained for not producing EWB at the relevant time, however immediately generated after detention
2018(11)LCX0036 Allahabad High Court Integrated Tech 9 Labs Private Limited	Writ petition dismissed without adjudicating the validity of seizure order giving liberty to petitioner to take the course to the appropriate remedy as available in law
2018(03)LCX0022 Allahabad High Court Shri Dutt India Private Limited	Having paid tax and penalty u/s 129 respondent is directed to complete adjudication within one month after affording an opportunity of hearing
2018(10)LCX0026 Allahabad High Court Bajrang Enterprises	Detention of goods u/s 129 for not producing EWB at relevant time
2018(04)LCX0039 Allahabad High Court Satyendra Goods Transport Corp	Goods detained for not accompanying TDF for inter state movement is unsustainable
2018(04)LCX0041 Allahabad High Court Singh Tyres	Seizure order unsustainable in law as the same has been passed ignoring EWB produced before the date fixed for reply, whereas the order has been passed on a day before the date allowed for reply
2018(04)LCX0038 Allahabad High Court Super India (Global) Logistics Ltd	Detention order for not accompanying TDF is illegal and unsustainable
2018(11)LCX0029 Allahabad High Court Mkc Traders And Another	Goods seized for not accompanying invoice and EWB
2018(06)LCX0051 Delhi High Court Gati Kintetsu Express Pvt. Ltd.	Seizure orders under Section 129(3) are appealable; remedy lies under Section 107, not writ.
2018(07)LCX0049 Gujarat High Court Vanrajbhai Hasmukhbhai Chauhan	Goods detained onthe ground that e-way bill was not tendered for the goods in movement , bill amount is under -invoice and LR is blank
2017(12)LCX0004 Kerala High Court Kalliyath Steel Traders	Goods detained under Section 129 can be released upon security under Rule 140(1), pending adjudication.
2018(11)LCX0009 Kerala High Court Daily Express	Compliance with the statutory mandate under Section 129(1)(b) is must for interim custody of the goods
2019(02)LCX0005 Kerala High Court Daily Express	Vehicle with goods detained as Part B of EWB was not complete
2018(01)LCX0052 Kerala High Court Kitex Ltd.	When the statute itself provides for such a mechanism, a deviation there from cannot be ordered, i.e. provisional release on payment of 50% tax as is ordered in the judgment under appeal cannot be sustained.
2018(11)LCX0014 Kerala High Court Tayab Zainulabdin	Goods released on furnishing Bank Guarantee for tax and penalty found due and a bond for the value of goods in the form as prescribed under Rule 140(1)
2018(11)LCX0028 Kerala High Court Nousad Allakkat	Non production of goods on demand is not a ground for imposition o penalty u/s 129
2018(09)LCX0011 Kerala High Court Panel Source LLP	Goods detained for not uploading Part-B of EWB
2018(07)LCX0002 Kerala High Court Fashion Marble and Granite Company Pvt. Ltd	Respondent's insistence that the petitioner should pay the amount either in cash or through demand draft against goods seized cannot be sustained
2018(10)LCX0041 Punjab and Haryana High Court Modern Insecticides Limited	Release of seized goods shall not be treated as provisional as there is no dispute regarding identity of the goods
2017(11)LCX0054 Kerala High Court Ramdev Trading Company	Seizure and penalty order unsustainable in absence of any allegation of evasion of tax
2017(08)LCX0050 Kerala High Court Madhu M.B	Goods detained due to the fact that on physical verification it was found that there were excess goods being transported interstate