Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
+ Post an Article
Post a New Article
Title :
0/200 char
Description :
Max 0 char
Category :
Co Author :

In case of Co-Author, You may provide Username as per TMI records

Delete Reply

Are you sure you want to delete your reply beginning with '' ?

Delete Issue

Are you sure you want to delete your Issue titled: '' ?

Articles

Back

All Articles

Advanced Search
Reset Filters
Search By:
Search by Text :
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms
Select Date:
FromTo
Category :
Sort By:
Relevance Date

Inter state movement of demo vehicles between distinct persons attracts GST

Bimal jain
Interstate Movement of Demo Vehicles Subject to GST, Rules Court; Compliance Required Under Rule 138 of CGST Rules. The Madhya Pradesh High Court ruled that the interstate movement of demo vehicles between distinct persons is subject to Goods and Services Tax (GST). M/s Kia Motors India Pvt. Ltd. challenged a tax and penalty order for not paying GST on such transactions, arguing that no sale or purchase occurred. The court noted that under Rule 138 of the CGST Rules, transporting goods valued over INR 50,000, regardless of supply status, requires compliance with GST regulations. The petitioner failed to provide the necessary information, leading to the dismissal of their petition and upholding the Appellate Authority's order. (AI Summary)

The Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in M/S KIA MOTORS INDIA PRIVATE LTD. VERSUS THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THR. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY LAW, COMMISSIONER (GST) STATE TAX INDORE, COMMISSIONER STATE TAX BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH) , STATE TAX OFFICER, THE UNION OF INDIA - 2023 (6) TMI 578 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT dismissed the writ and held transporting demo vehicle from one state to another between distinct person attracts GST.

Facts:

M/s Kia Motors India Pvt. Ltd. (“the Petitioner”) challenged an order passed by theAppellate Authority dated December 23, 2019 upholding the demand of tax and penalty pertaining to non-payment of GST on transporting demo vehicles from one state to another between distinct person.

The Petitioner contended that bringing demo vehicle into the State does not make transaction exigible to GST as there is no sale or purchase transaction taken place.

The Revenue Department contended that the Section 129 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (“the CGST Act”)r.w. Rule 138 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 ('the CGST Rules”) the movement of goods exceeding value INR 50,000/- even if they do not fall under the definition of supply, becomes exigible to GST.

Issue:

Whether movement of demo vehicles from one state to another between distinct person attracts GST?

Held:

The Madhya Pradesh High Court in M/S KIA MOTORS INDIA PRIVATE LTD. VERSUS THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THR. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY LAW, COMMISSIONER (GST) STATE TAX INDORE, COMMISSIONER STATE TAX BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH) , STATE TAX OFFICER, THE UNION OF INDIA - 2023 (6) TMI 578 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURTheld as under:

  • Noted that, as per Rule 138(1)(ii) of the CGST Rules, causing of movement of goods exceeding the value INR 50,000/- even if the reason is not related to supply would requires taxpayer to fill Form-A GST, EWB-01 on the common portal along-with necessary information.
  • Further noted that, the Petitioner has not provided any information which is mandatory as per Rule 138(1) of the CGST Rules.
  • Held that, transportation of demo vehicles from one state to another between distinct persons is exigible to GST.
  • Dismissed the petition after finding no fault in order of Appellate Authority.

(Author can be reached at [email protected])

answers
Sort by
+ Add A New Reply
Hide
+ Add A New Reply
Hide
Recent Articles