^®
TaxReply India Private Limited

GST Library

Best GST Library

Subscription Plans

TaxGPT

GST News | Updates

GST Calendar

GST Case Laws

GST Case Laws Sitemap

GST Notifications, Circulars, Releases etc.

Act & Rules

Act & Rules (Multi-view)

GST Rates

HSN Codes ^New

GST Forms

GST Diary

GST Notebook

GST Fees Manager

GST Council Meetings

GST Set-off Calculator

ITC Reversal Calculator

E-invoice Calculator

Inverted Duty Calculator

GSTR-3B Manual

GSTR-9 Manual

GSTR-9C Manual

Full Site Search

E-way Bill

Finance Bill

GST e-books

TaxReply Support

YouTube Videos

Twitter

Buy Premium Tax Domains

About Us

Our Services

🔒

TaxReply India Pvt Ltd

🔒

^®

Subscribe Free GST updates on...

Subscribe to Best GST Library of India and get ahead of the rest. Click here for plans. | GST Act & Rules e-book Click here. |

M/S. BEST SELLERS (COCHIN) PRIVATE LIMITED vs. THE ASSISTANT STATE TAX OFFICER
(Kerala High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR

Pet. Counsel

S.abu Baker Kunju

Res. Counsel

Thushara James

Petitioner / Applicant	M/S. BEST SELLERS (COCHIN) PRIVATE LIMITED
Respondent	THE ASSISTANT STATE TAX OFFICER
Court	Kerala High Court
State	Kerala
Date	Sep 17, 2020
Order No.	WP(C).No.18522 OF 2020(M)
Citation	2020(9) TAXREPLY 3358
Add to Favorites	Add to favorites.
Download Original Order
Print (Full Page)
Print (Judgement Only)

TaxGPT ^Beta

Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

AA |

ORDER
The petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by Ext.P7 detention notice issued to him in Form GST MOV-7. In the Writ Petition, it is the case of the petitioner that the transportation was of a consignment of watches that had been supplied to him by the seller in Delhi at a discounted rate of ₹ 8.99. It is seen that the transportation of the goods was accompanied by Ext.P4 tax invoice, where the supplier in Delhi had shown the actual price of the consignment of watches, which was ₹ 4,49,550/- and had given a discount of almost the entire amount save to the extent of ₹ 8.99, and had paid IGST at the rate of 18% on the actual value of the watches. The consignment was detained by the respondent, on the ground that, although the consignment was covered by a valid invoice, it was not accompanied by a valid e-way bill. The learned counsel for the petitioner would point that inasmuch as the discounted value of the goods was less than ₹ 50,000/-, there was no requirement for th....