K.G. UNNIKRISHNAN Versus ASSISTANT STATE TAX OFFICER SUQAD NO. III, SGST DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM AND STATE OF KERALA DEPARTMENT OF TAXES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
GST
2018 (11) TMI 334 – KERALA HIGH COURT – TMI
KERALA HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 18-9-2018
WP(C). No. 3973 of 2018
GST
MR DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J.
\nFor The Petitioner : ADV. SRI.M.UNNIKRISHNA MENON
\nFor The Respondents : ADV. GOVERNMENT PLEADER
\nJUDGMENT
\nThe petitioner, a dealer under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act (KVAT Act), migrated to the regime of Goods and Services Tax Act (GST Act). While he was transporting orthopedic implants, the consignment was detained. Faced with proceedings under Section 129 of the GST Act, the petitioner filed this writ petitio<\/p>\n
= = = = = = = =<\/p>\n
Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n format and, later, the GST counsel issued clarifications. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" K.G. UNNIKRISHNAN Versus ASSISTANT STATE TAX OFFICER SUQAD NO. III, SGST DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM AND STATE OF KERALA DEPARTMENT OF TAXES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAMGST2018 (11) TMI 334 – KERALA HIGH COURT – TMIKERALA HIGH COURT – HCDated:- 18-9-2018WP(C). No. 3973 of 2018 GSTMR DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J. For The Petitioner : ADV. SRI.M.UNNIKRISHNA MENON For The Respondents : … Continue reading “K.G. UNNIKRISHNAN Versus ASSISTANT STATE TAX OFFICER SUQAD NO. III, SGST DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM AND STATE OF KERALA DEPARTMENT OF TAXES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-14853","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14853","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=14853"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14853\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=14853"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=14853"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=14853"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n5. As per the petitioner's assertion, the authorities were unaware the procedure to be followed. The authorities, according to him, ought not have mechanically mulcted penalty on the petitioner. The Government Pleader, on the other hand, submits that the authorities have followed the procedure and passed the Ext.P8 order. If the petitioner has any grievance against it, he can file a statutory appeal under Section 107 of the Act.
\n4. Under these circumstances, without adverting to the merits of the matter, I hold that the petitioner can pay the demanded tax and penalty under protest, to got the goods released. Then, the petitioner can contest the penalty proceedings before the a<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n