Order Dated: 24 May 2022

Facts:

• The Petitioner, Progressive Enterprise, was under contract with the private company under which they had to transport, install and commission telecommunication materials throughout the State of Tripura.
• One such consignment containing two tax invoices, had been generated and two e-way bills against the said consignment and the consignment was being transported to Agartala from Guwahati by TATA Yodha vehicle and that vehicle was transporting goods back to Guwahati. 
• While the goods were being taken back from Tripura to Guwahati on a transport vehicle, on 26.04.2022 the Inspector of State Taxes, Churaibari inspected the vehicle and asked the driver to produce relevant documents. The driver is stated to have informed the Inspector that he is waiting for the fresh tax invoices and e-way bills for outward transportation of the telecommunication materials.
• The issue involved was in spite of the new e-way bills provided by the driver-in-question, the authorities did not allow the goods to be moved and initiated proceedings against the petitioner.  

Issues:

• Whether, the authorities were right in initiating proceedings against the petitioner?

Order:

• The Court observed that the vehicle-in-question and the driver concerned produced the e-way bill prior to seeking permission to leave the State of Tripura and the e-way bill produced is the new e-way bill. It was obligatory on part of the statutory authorities to go through the same and if the same was found in order, to permit the transport of the machinery and/or consignment concerned.
• The consignor had sent the goods to the State of Tripura, however, due to various reasons cited in the petition including non-availability of land, etc. the consignor sought to take back the goods from Tripura to Guwahati and the necessary e-way bill for such transportation was also provided.
• Rule 138 (10) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 which applies in the present case and in particular second proviso thereof conceivable situation where e-way bills can either be amended or reissued for the selfsame consignment, but bona fide reasons for such change must be justified. The only lawful inference therefrom is that the said Rule has been complied with by the petitioner consequent to which fresh e-way bills were issued and produced before the concerned authorities.   
• The Court held that there is no justifications in further detention of the goods. Therefore, the writ petition stands disposed of and any proceedings initiated against the petitioner shall stand quashed.