TaxTMI Login
🎉 Festive Offer: Flat 15% off on all plans! →⚡ Don’t Miss Out: Limited-Time Offer →
TaxTMI 
Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Movement of demo vehicle without Form-A GST and EWB-01 under Rule 138(1)(ii) attracts GST liability</h1> <h3>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</h3> The HC held that the movement of a demo vehicle into Madhya Pradesh without furnishing mandatory information under Rule 138(1)(ii) of the GST Rules ... Levy of GST - supply or not - bringing of demo vehicle into the State of Madhya Pradesh - financial consideration is involved or not - HELD THAT:- Bare perusal of the relevant statutory rule i.e. Rule 138(1)(ii) makes it clear that the causing of movement of a goods exceeding the value of Rs.50,000/- even for the reasons other than supply, makes it incumbent upon the supplier to inform about the supply of goods in Form-A GST, EWB-01 electronically on the common portal alongwith other information as required. It is not disputed at the Bar that no such information as mandatory in Rule 138(1) of GST Rules, was given by the petitioner supplier. It is obvious that in the absence of information given, the entry of demo car into the State of Madhya Pradesh renders it exigible to GST - This Court does not find any fault or jurisdictional error in the order of appellate authority dated 23.12.2019 - Petition dismissed. Issues involved: Challenge to order reducing tax and penalty, applicability of GST on demo vehicle transported in Madhya Pradesh.Summary:The petition filed under Article 226 challenges the order reducing tax and penalty on a demo vehicle transported in Madhya Pradesh. The petitioner argues that the vehicle was not for sale, thus not liable to GST. The petitioner relies on the definition of 'supply' under Section 7 of the GST Act and CBDT circulars. The respondent argues that under Section 129 of the GST Act, goods exceeding Rs.50,000 in value are liable to GST even if not a supply.Section 129 of GST Act allows detention and seizure of goods in transit for contravention of rules, with penalties specified. Rule 138 mandates information prior to movement of goods exceeding Rs.50,000. The petitioner did not provide this information, making the demo vehicle liable to GST in Madhya Pradesh.The Court upholds the appellate authority's order, finding no fault or jurisdictional error. The writ petition is dismissed.
TaxTMI 
