The petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by a detention of his goods during the course of transportation. It is seen from Ext.P8 order in FORM GST MOV-9, that the reason for detention was that the validity period of the e-way bill that accompanied the transportation of goods had already expired. In that sense, I do not see the detention as unjustified as the transportation was not accompanied by a valid transport document at the time of detention. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits, however, that there is an issue regarding the legality of inclusion of the cess component in the quantification of the amount liable to be paid under S. 129 of the GST Act, I direct the respondents to release the goods and vehicle on the petitioner furnishing a Bank guarantee for the amount demanded in Ext.P10 order. It is made clear that the clearance of the goods against the Bank guarantee furnished shall be without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to question the legality of the inclusion of the Cess amount in the computation of the demand in Ext.P10 order as also to raise other legal contentions in the appeal proposed to be filed against the impugned order, before the appellate authority.

The writ petition is disposed as above.