Goods and Services Tax

E-WAY BILL – SOME ISSUES

Goods and Services Tax – GST – By: – Mr. M. GOVINDARAJAN – Dated:- 11-3-2019 Last Replied Date:- 11-3-2019 – Omission to upload E-way bill In Kun Motor Co. Private Limited v. Assistant Tax Officer, Kerala State GST Department, Trivandrum – 2018 (12) TMI 531 – KERALA HIGH COURT the first appellant is a dealer in motor vehicles and the second appellant purchased a mini-cooper car from the first appellant. The goods were transported in a specially equipped carriage by road. The invoice of purchase of car showed collection of IGST, obviously deeming the sale to be an inter-State one. An invoice is issued for the transporting charges, which too shows collection of IGST, being the tax for service of transportation of the vehicle. The vehicle in which the car was carried was detained within the Kerala State. A notice was issued to the appellants. One among the grounds alleged in the show cause notice is that no e-way bill having been uploaded. The order of detention was issued only on the fa

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

t taxable transaction for movement of car from Puducherry to Trivandrum. Non completion of e-way bill In Daily Express v. Assistant Tax Officer, State GST Department, Kollam – 2018 (12) TMI 138 – KERALA HIGH COURT the petitioner is a transporter. The State Officials intercepted the vehicle and detained them. He issued order for physical verification/inspection of the conveyance. He also issued a notice under section 129(3). The reason assigned for detention is that Part B of the accompanied e-way bill has not completed and therefore not valid for the movement of goods as per section 138 of the GST Act and Rules made there under. Since the State tax officers refused to release the goods the petitioner approached the High Court by filing a writ petition. The petitioner put forth the following arguments before the High Court- The petitioner is only a transporter and it receives paltry sums never exceeding ₹ 2,000/- as transport charges. Section 129 in its entirety does not apply to

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

o have the interim release of the goods, there is no escape from section 129. Section 129 (1)(b) applies to all other persons interested in the goods than the consigner. The High Court further held that the notices did not suffer from any legal infirmity. If the petitioner wants the interim custody of the goods, it may comply with the statutory mandate under section 129(1)(b) and get them released. Section 129(1)(b) of the Act provides that the detained vehicles with the goods may be released on payment of the applicable tax and penalty equal to the fifty per cent. of the value of the goods reduced by the tax amount paid thereon and, in case of exempted goods, on payment of an amount equal to five per cent. of the value of goods or twenty-five thousand rupees, whichever is less, where the owner of the goods does not come forward for payment of such tax and penalty. In Preethi Kitchen Appliances Private Limited v. State Tax Officer, Chennai – 2019 (1) TMI 679 – MADRAS HIGH COURT the imp

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

pondent within four days of the order and on receipt of such payment, the detailed goods shall be released forthwith. Bill to Ship to concept Section 10(1)(b) of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 explains the Bill to Ship to concept. The said section provides that the place of supply of goods, other than supply of goods imported into, or exported from India, shall be where the goods are delivered by the supplier to a recipient or any other person on the direction of a third person, whether acting as an agent or otherwise, before or during movement of goods, either by way of transfer of documents of title to the goods or otherwise, it shall be deemed that the said third person has received the goods and the place of supply of such goods shall be the principal place of business of such person. In re Sanjog Steels Private Limited – 2018 (12) TMI 1156 – AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, RAJASTHAN the applicant is manufacturing of TMT steel bars in its own brand name Sanjog Sona T

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

inal customer, involves four persons i.e., the applicant, RSE, Goyal and the final customer. The Authority is of the opinion that section 10(1)(b) of IGST Act, 2017 does nowhere limit the transaction to only three parties/persons. The said section only contemplates about role of third party and declaration of principal place of business . Therefore the supply from the applicant to the final customer on a Bill to Ship to mode as per the provisions of section 10(1)(b) of IGST Act, 2017 is permissible. The press note of Ministry of Finance on Issues regarding Bill to Ship to for e-way bill under CGST Rules, 2017, dated 23.04.2018 clearly emphasize that only a single e-way bill is to be used either from the supplier of the goods or by third party. The Authority ruled that the applicant can issue an e-way bill in which the bill to will be mentioned in the name of RSE where ship to would be in the name of final customer. Minor discrepancy In Diamond Metal v. State of UP – 2 2018 (11) TMI 56

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Leave a Reply