RAI PREXIM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED Versus STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY (TAXES), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THE COMMISSIONER OF STATE GST KERALA STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, ASSISTANT STATE TAX OFFICER SQUAD NO. VII, KERALA STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT, PALAKKAD, AMITY ROCK PRODUCTS PVT. LTD., THE UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY (REVENUE), NEW DELHI, GOODS AND SERVICE TAX COUNCIL THROUGH ITS CHAIRPERSON, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE, NEW DELHI, GOODS AND SERVICE TAX NETWORK THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN, EAST WING, NEW DELHI, AND CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAXES CENTRAL GST OFFICE, KERALAD
GST
2018 (12) TMI 1004 – KERALA HIGH COURT – 2019 (23) G. S. T. L. 454 (Ker.)
KERALA HIGH COURT – <\/p>\n
= = = = = = = =<\/p>\n
Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n d another e-Way bill produced as Ext.P5. In Ext.P5, the place of delivery was correctly shown as 'Pathanamthitta'. However, the value of the goods was mentioned as Rs. 388220\/- instead of Rs. 3882200. Taking exception to this e-Way bill, goods have been detained. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" RAI PREXIM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED Versus STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY (TAXES), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THE COMMISSIONER OF STATE GST KERALA STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, ASSISTANT STATE TAX OFFICER SQUAD NO. VII, KERALA STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT, PALAKKAD, AMITY ROCK PRODUCTS PVT. LTD., THE UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE … Continue reading “RAI PREXIM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED Versus STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY (TAXES), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THE COMMISSIONER OF STATE GST KERALA STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, ASSISTANT STATE TAX OFFICER SQUAD”<\/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-15569","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15569","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=15569"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15569\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=15569"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=15569"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=15569"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n2. If a human error which can be seen on naked eye is detected, such human error cannot be capitalised for penalisation. Normally, this Court could not have persuaded to accept the contention on prima facie value as it is a matter for decision by competent authority and this Court can only order release of the vehicle and goods as against Bank guarantee. But I am persuaded to adopt a different course for the simple reason that if the petitioner had paid the IGST in accorda<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n