CARPENTERS CLASSICS INDIA PVT. LTD. Versus ASSISTANT STATE TAX OFFICER, STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT, MUTHANGA, COMMISSION OF STATE TAXES, THIRUVANNATHAPURAM AND STATE OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
GST
2018 (11) TMI 1571 – KERALA HIGH COURT – [2019] 61 G S.T.R. 185 (Ker), 2019 (20) G. S. T. L. 714 (Ker.)
KERALA HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 27-11-2018
WP (C). No. 38306 of 2018
GST
MR DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J.
\nFor The Petitioner : ADVS. SRI. K. N. SREEKUMARAN SRI. N. SANTHOSHKUMAR AND SRI. P. J. ANILKUMAR
\nFor The Respondent : DR. THUSHARA JAMES, GP
\nJUDGMENT
\nThe petitioner, based at Bangalore, imports Kitchen cabinets, then, supplies and installs them in the houses of the customers, on their placing the orders. On 21.11.2018, the petitioner sent a consignment of three sets of kitchen cabinets to be installed in the houses of the customers in Thalassery and Kozhikode. The petitioner proposed to send them to Ernakulam and from there, it wanted to distribute to <\/p>\n
= = = = = = = =<\/p>\n
Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n he GST Act, for the provisional release of the goods, the petitioner has filed this writ petition. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n the petitioner can put forward all its defences and may avoid any fine or penalty. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n notification, require a class of transporters to obtain a unique Radio Frequency Identification Device and get the said device embedded on to the conveyance and map the e-way bill to the Radio Frequency Identification Device prior to the movement of goods. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" CARPENTERS CLASSICS INDIA PVT. LTD. Versus ASSISTANT STATE TAX OFFICER, STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT, MUTHANGA, COMMISSION OF STATE TAXES, THIRUVANNATHAPURAM AND STATE OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAMGST2018 (11) TMI 1571 – KERALA HIGH COURT – [2019] 61 G S.T.R. 185 (Ker), 2019 (20) G. S. T. L. 714 (Ker.)KERALA HIGH COURT – HCDated:- 27-11-2018WP (C). … Continue reading “CARPENTERS CLASSICS INDIA PVT. LTD. Versus ASSISTANT STATE TAX OFFICER, STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT, MUTHANGA, COMMISSION OF STATE TAXES, THIRUVANNATHAPURAM AND STATE OF KERALA, 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-15282","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15282","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=15282"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15282\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=15282"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=15282"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=15282"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n4. Sri K. N. Sreekumaran, the petitioner's counsel has advanced his arguments laced with emotion and a bit of rhetoric, too. He stressed that despite the change in tax regime, the authorities still refuse to change their mind set. According to him, the authority's literal approach is virtually stifling every industry and dampening the entrepreneurial spirit of the business people, as well.
\n5. Sri Sreekumaran also contends that even before the consignment could be dispatched from Bangalore, the petitioner generated the e-way bill online-and it is a verifiable fact. Though the driver carried the bill physically, as he is illiterate or semiliterate, he could not understand what the Assistant Tax Officer demanded. Perhaps panicked, he produced only the invoices and the local e-way bill, but not the e-way bill first generated for transporting the consignment from Bangalore to Ernakul<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n8. Heard Sri K. N. Sreekumaran, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Dr. Thusahara James, the learned Government Pleader for the respondents.
\n9. Indeed, I reckon the petitioner may have a genuine grievance. I also accept that it may not have tried to evade any tax. And the transaction, in that sense, could have been above board. That said, I must also note that the Assistant State Tax Officer followed only the law-especially, Rule 138A. And that rule reads thus:
\n 138A. Documents and devices to be carried by a person- in-charge of a conveyance.-(1) The person in charge of a conveyance shall carry-
\n (a) the invoice or bill of supply or delivery challan, as the case may be; and (b) a copy of the e-way bill in physical form or the e-way bill number in electronic form or mapped to a Radio Frequency Identification Device embedded on to the conveyance in such manner as may be notified by the Commissi<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n (5) Notwithstanding anything contained in clause (b) of sub-rule (1), where circumstances so warrant, he Commissioner may, by notification, require the person-in-charge of the conveyance to carry the following documents instead of the eway bill.
\n (a) tax invoice or bill of supply or bill of entry; or
\n (b) a delivery challan, where the goods are transported for reasons other than by way of supply.”
\n10. As the learned Government Pleader has rightly contended, if online generation of e-way bill suffices, the Rule would not have insisted on the consignment carrying a copy of the bill or the number in electronic form. At any rate, the issue now concerns only the provisional release and the statute provides an efficacious mechanis<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n