The petitioner is a registered dealer in GST in Gomti Nagar, Uttarpradesh engaged in the business of manufacturing and supply of renewable energy systems. A government controlled undertaking placed the order to petitioner for any supply and the said supply was made by petitioner in four lots. The order was being executed from telangna factory of petitioner and against the said supply all the compliance of GST was followed. But when the goods reached to lucknow it was intercepted and seized under section 129 of  GST Act,2017 stating the reason that E way bill system in CGST was replaced by State E Way bills, which the CG has suspended w.e.f . 2^nd Feb 2018. Despite of deposited tax on comply with E way bill by petitioner the seizure order was passed directing him to deposit tax and penalty. The petitioner submitted bank guarantee and relased the goods and appeal to tribunal under section 107 of GST Act,2017 after depositing 10% of disputed amount in Mar 2018 but the state authority asked petitioner to encash the bank guarantee.

In the case Godrej and Boyce Mfg Vs State of UP 587 of 2018 where the court after thorough analysis of entire provisions of similar case found some discripencies that GST fancy has still confusion in some provision and government is in view to solve the same. In another case Manju Nath Trading Co Vs State of UP and Ors, the court held that E way bill shall not be demanded till 31^st Mar 2018.