9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (2) TMI 592X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... V. SRI. BOBBY JOHN RESPONDENTS: GP-SMT. THUSHARA JAMES JUDGMENT Heard both sides. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the petitioner is a partnership firm doing business in the name and style of UP & UP elevators at Cherthala in Alapuzha. He argued that on 11.01.2021, the petitioner purchased 4 numbers of Control Panels from M/s. Propower Systems Pv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r a distances up to 50 kms only, within the State. As such, there was no necessity to update the e-way bill. It is further argued that omission to extend the e-way bill is only a minor offence, as the goods were covered by proper tax invoice and as such, action of detention of goods is totally unjustified. 3. The learned Government Pleader argued that the petition as framed and filed is not maint ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty of the e-way bill had expired and it was not re-validated within the prescribed time. As a consequence, notice under Section 129(3) of the GST Act came to be issued with a direction to the petitioner authority to appear before the respondent authority on 24.01.2021 for showing cause as to why necessary action as contemplated under Section 129 of the GST Act should not be taken. 6. Thus, the ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
