Heard Mr. M. Naga Deepak, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. L.Venkateshwara Rao, learned Standing Counsel for the Commercial Tax Department appearing for the respondents.

2. By filing this Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner seeks quashing of order dated 12.11.2021 as well as detention order dated 30.10.2021 of respondent No.2.

3. Petitioner is a proprietary concern and is registered as a dealer under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short ‘the CGST Act’) as well as under the Telangana State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017(for short ‘the TSGST Act’). In connection with its business activities, petitioner had placed an order with M/s.Keshree Metallurgies Private Limited for TMT bars, for which tax invoice for an amount of ₹ 7,91,721.00 was issued, which included an amount of ₹ 60,385.00 towards CGST and also equivalent amount towards TSGST. While the goods were on transit, the transit vehicle bearing registration No.AP 28 X 1849 had a break down because of which, the goods could not be transported further. After repair, once the vehicle started proceeding towards the premises of the petitioner, it was intercepted by personnel under respondent No.1 whereafter, the vehicle along with the goods carried by it were seized on 30.10.2021 at 3.30 p.m., on the ground that the goods were being transported without a valid e-way bill.

4. Pursuant to the detention of the goods, respondent No.2 issued detention order dated 30.10.2021, followed by another order dated 12.11.2021, determining the tax payable by the petitioner at ₹ 60,385.00 towards CGST and also equivalent amount towards TSGST. Additionally, 100% penalty of ₹ 1,20,770.00 was imposed on the petitioner. Aggrieved, present Writ Petition has been filed seeking the reliefs as indicated above.

5. On 29.11.2021, learned Standing Counsel was asked to file a counter-affidavit or obtain instructions. Today, learned Standing Counsel submits, on instructions, that the e-way bill relied upon by the petitioner does not pertain to the goods carried by the vehicle, which was seized. He, therefore, justifies the passing of both the impugned orders by respondent No.1.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to page 22 of the paper book wherefrom, he submits that as per the tax invoice, petitioner had paid ₹ 60,385.50 for CGST and also equivalent amount for SGST. Therefore, the tax component has been paid by the petitioner. In so far as penalty is concerned, he submits that petitioner is ready and willing to pay the penalty as the vehicle is under seizure.

7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on due consideration, we direct that if the petitioner pays the penalty of ₹ 1,20,770.00, within a period of four weeks from today, the vehicle bearing registration No.AP 28X 1849 along with the goods, seized by respondent No.1 on 30.10.2020, shall be released to the petitioner.

8. We make it clear that this order is only for the purpose of release of the vehicle along with goods on payment of penalty by the petitioner.

9. Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. Related interim application is also disposed of.

10. No costs.