In Assistant State Tax Officer (Intelligence) v. M/s. VST & Sons (P) Limited and Muthukumar Meenakshy [WA No. 914 of 2021 dated July 22, 2021], the Assistant State Tax officer (Appellant) filed an appeal against the judgement dated October 21, 2020 [WP (C) 22304/2020] (Impugned Judgement).
Earlier, M/s. VST & Sons (P) Limited and Muthukumar Meenakshy (the Respondents) had filed writ petition [WP (C) 22304/2020] against the detention of the ‘Range Rover’ motor vehicle while being transported from Coimbatore to Thiruvananthapuram as ‘used personal effect’. The vehicle was detained on the allegation that it was transported without the E-way bill as contemplated under Rule 138 of the Kerala Goods and Service Tax Rules, 2017 (“the KGST Rules”). The Hon’ble Kerala High Court had allowed the writ petition vide the Impugned Judgement. Being aggrieved, the Appellant has filed the present writ appeal.
The Hon’ble Kerala High Court while dismissing the petition of the Appellant relied upon the decision in the case of KUN Motor Company Private Limited and Others v. the Assistant State Tax Officer, Squad No.3 Kerala State, Goods and Service Tax Department and Others [(2019) 60 GSRT 144 (Kerala)] and held that the goods that classified under personal and household effect falls under Rule 138(14)(a) of the KGST Rules and are exempted from the requirement of e-way bill.
Further held that, used vehicles, even if it has run only negligible distances are to be categorized as ‘used personal effects’.
******
DISCLAIMER: The views expressed are strictly of the author and A2Z Taxcorp LLP. The contents of this article are solely for informational purpose. It does not constitute professional advice or recommendation of firm. Neither the author nor firm and its affiliates accepts any liabilities for any loss or damage of any kind arising out of any information in this article nor for any actions taken in reliance thereon.
(Author can be reached at info@a2ztaxcorp.com)
Author Bio
