Key Pointers-

• The Petitioner, Techno Fabs submitted that the goods in movement from Kolkata to Budaun were seized on 11.02.2018 on the ground that they were not accompanied with the E-way bill.
• The petitioner further submitted that during the period from 1.2.2018 to 31.3.2018 the requirement of the E-way bill was not applicable to the transaction of the petitioner.
• The Issue involved in this case is whether the goods seized on the ground that they were not accompanied with the E-way bill is sustainable?
• The Single Bench of Hon’ble High Court observed that this aspect of the matter has been considered by the Division Bench of this Court in Writ Tax No. 587 of 2018 (M/S Godrej and Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd. vs. State of U.P. and two others) decided on 18.9.2018 and it has been held that the goods were not covered with the requirement of E-way bill during 1.2.2018 to 31.3.2018.
• The goods in the present case were seized on 11.02.2018 that is only for the reason they were not accompanied with the E-way bill. Since the requirement of the E-way bill was not applicable for the petitioner during the above period, the seizure itself is bad in law. 
• Accordingly, the impugned seizure order dated 11.02.2018 passed under Section 129(1) of U.P. GST is hereby quashed and all consequential proceedings stands dropped.
• The writ petition filed by the petitioner is allowed.