HUSKY INJECTION MOLDING SYSTEMS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED Versus THE COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX KERALA GST TAX TOWER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, ASST. COMMISSIONER (INT) PALAKKAD, KERALA GST DEPARTMENT PALAKKAD, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, PALAKKAD AND ASST. STATE TAX OFFICER SQUAD NO. 1 KERALA GST DEPARTMENT PALAKKAD – 2019 (2) TMI 329 – KERALA HIGH COURT – TMI – Detention of goods and vehicle – Failure to remit tax and penalty u/s 129 of KGST Act, 2017 – Confiscation u/s 130 of the Act justified or not? – Held that:- We are afraid that the time for raising such a contention has not arisen, since as of now the Department has not proceeded under Section 130.
–
On furnishing the Bank Guarantee for tax and penalty as provided under Rule 141 o
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ected that,for remitting the amount temporary registration will be permitted. However, the appellant is not ready to make remittance of money as such, but undertakes to furnish Bank Guarantee. 2. Incidentally, learned Counsel Sri.Joseph Prabhakar also raise a contention on the basis of Section 130 of the Kerala Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 ( Act for short). Whether the failure to remit tax and penalty as provided under Section 129 of the Act, would lead to confiscation of goods under the provisions of Section 130. We are afraid that the time for raising such a contention has not arisen, since as of now the Department has not proceeded under Section 130. We gave Sri.Joseph Prabhakar the choice to withdraw the Writ Petition and challenge
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =