Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases GST GST + HC GST - 2018 (12) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2018 (12) TMI 531 - HC - GST


Issues Involved:
1. Requirement of e-way bill for transport of a used car.
2. Nature of sale: inter-state vs. intra-state.
3. Definition of "used personal effects" under GST rules.
4. Legality of vehicle detention under Section 129 of the KSGST Act.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Requirement of e-way bill for transport of a used car:
The court examined whether the omission to upload an e-way bill for transporting a car purchased in Puthuchery to Thiruvananthapuram attracts Section 129 of the Kerala State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The court found that there is no mandate to upload an e-way bill for transporting used personal effects, which includes a used car, as per sub-rule (14) of Rule 138 of the Kerala Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017.

2. Nature of sale: inter-state vs. intra-state:
The court delved into the nature of the sale to determine if it was an inter-state or intra-state transaction. It was noted that the seller understood the sale to be inter-state, as evidenced by the invoices showing IGST collection. The court referred to Sections 7 and 10 of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, which define inter-state supply based on the location of the supplier and the place of supply. The court concluded that the sale was completed in Puthuchery when the purchaser took possession of the car, obtained temporary registration, and insurance in his name. Hence, the movement of the car to Thiruvananthapuram was not occasioned by the sale transaction but was a prerogative of the purchaser.

3. Definition of "used personal effects" under GST rules:
The court addressed whether the brand new car, once purchased and temporarily registered, could be considered a "used personal effect." The court referred to dictionary definitions and legal precedents to conclude that a car becomes a used personal effect once it is purchased, registered, and driven, even if only for a short distance. The car, having run 17 kilometers, was deemed a used personal effect exempt from the e-way bill requirement under Rule 138.

4. Legality of vehicle detention under Section 129 of the KSGST Act:
The court analyzed the legality of the vehicle's detention under Section 129, which deals with the detention, seizure, and release of goods and conveyance in transit. The court found that the vehicle's detention was illegal since the transport was of used personal effects, which are exempt from the e-way bill requirement. The court noted that the applicable tax had already been paid, and the vehicle was accompanied by the necessary invoices. The court quashed the notice and order of detention, deeming them illegal and without jurisdiction.

Conclusion:
The judgment concluded that the transport of the car did not require an e-way bill as it was a used personal effect. The sale was completed in Puthuchery, making it an intra-state sale, and the subsequent transport was not occasioned by the sale transaction. The vehicle's detention under Section 129 was found to be illegal, and the court quashed the notice and order of detention, allowing the appeal and setting aside the judgment in the writ petition.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates