The petitioner is a a goods transporting agency and an assessee under the CGST Act. While it was transporting goods from Tirunelveli to Kerala, the Assistant State Tax Officer detained the vehicle and the goods. The detention is because the petitioner did not upload the Part-B e-way bill.

2. In the writ petition, the petitioner sought the following reliefs:

“(i) Issue a writ of Certiorari, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction as this Honourable Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case, calling for the records leading to the issue of Ext.P7 order and Ext.P7(a) notice and after scrutinizing the same, to strike down and quash them;

(ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, orders or directions directing the respondent to refrain from proceeding further under section 129 of the Act based on Ext.P7 and Ext.P7(a);

(iii) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, orders or directions, directing the respondent to release the goods to the petitioner without collecting any security under Section 129(1)(c).”

3. The learned Division Bench of this Court in Renji Lal Damodaran Vs. State Tax Officer Judgment dated 6.8.18 in W.A.No.1640/2018 has dealt with an identical issue.

4. Applying the ratio of that judgment, I direct the respondent authority to release the petitioner’s goods and vehicle on the petitioner’s “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) of the CGST Rules”.

With the above direction I dispose of the writ petition.