In Assistant State Tax Officer v. VST and Sons and Ors. [WA NO. 914 OF 2021 dated July 22, 2021], Assistant State Tax Officer (Petitioner) had filed an appeal challenging the judgement dated October 21, 2020 in WP(C) 22304/2020 in the Kerala High Court. The aforementioned writ petition was filed by VST and Sons (Respondent No.1) challenging the detention of the ‘RANGE ROVER’ motor vehicle belonging to one Muthukumar Meenakshy (Respondent No. 2) while being transported from Coimbatore to Thiruvananthapuram as ‘used personal effect’ of the Respondent No. 2.

The Petitioner contended that the vehicle was detained on the allegation that the same was transported without the E-way bill as contemplated under Rule 138 of the Kerala Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017.


The Honorable Kerala High Court took heed of all the facts and evidences at their perusal and opined that goods that are classifiable as used personal and household effect falls under Rule 138 (14) (a) of the Kerala Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 and are exempted from the requirement of e-way bill. Furthermore, it was noted that the Respondent No. 2 had purchased the vehicle after payment of Integrated Goods and Services Tax (“IGST”). A temporary registration was also taken apart from the motor vehicle insurance.

The decision in the case of Kun Motor Co. Pvt. Ltd. And Vishnu Mohan v. The Asst. State Tax Officer, Squad No. III, Kerala State GST Department And State Of Kerala [2018 (12) TMI 531 – KERALA HIGH COURT] held that used vehicles, even if it has run only negligible distances are to be categorized as ‘used personal effects’ – the facts in the present appeal is similar if not almost identical to the facts in the above referred decision, except for the change in place from Puducherry to Coimbatore.


(Author can be reached at [email protected])

Author Bio

More Under Goods and Services Tax

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Search Posts by Date

September 2021