Where bank guarantee was furnished and the bond was executed, vehicle would be released.

Key takeaways:

- The petitioner's vehicle was detained due to the absence of an e-way bill, which is a violation of statutory rules.

- The petitioner proposed to provide a bank guarantee for the full amount to secure the release of the vehicle.

- The Senior Government Pleader agreed to the release of the vehicle on the condition that the petitioner furnishes a bank guarantee for the entire amount and executes a bond under Rule 140(1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules.

- The court ordered the release of the vehicle upon the fulfillment of these conditions.

------------------------------------------

The petitioner challenges the detention of his vehicle ordered through Ext.P2. He says that the primary reason shown in Ext.P2 is that the consignment was not supported by e-way bill and though he concedes that this is a violation of the statutory rules, he offers to furnish bank guarantee for the entire amount for releasing the vehicle.

2. The learned Senior Government Pleader submits that the vehicle can be released on the petitioner furnishing a bank guarantee for the entire amount as shown in Ext.P2 as well as after executing a bond under the Rule 140(1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules.

3. In view of the above submission, I order this writ petition directing the petitioner to furnish a bank guarantee for an amount Rs.1,12,148/-, and on the petitioner executing a bond under Rule 140(1) of the CGST Rules. As soon as the bank guarantee is furnished and the bond is executed, the vehicle will be released to the petitioner.

This writ petition is ordered accordingly.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

JUDGE