^®
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. |

MANOJ N.S vs. ASSISTANT STATE TAX OFFICER
(Kerala High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

A.M.BADAR

Pet. Counsel

K.j.renjith

Res. Counsel

Thushara James

Petitioner / Applicant	MANOJ N.S
Respondent	ASSISTANT STATE TAX OFFICER
Court	Kerala High Court
State	Kerala
Date	Jan 22, 2021
Order No.	WP(C). No.1782 of 2021(W)
Citation	2021(1) TAXREPLY 3953
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
Heard both sides. 2. By this petition, the petitioner prays for a direction to the 1st respondent to release vehicle KL-04-AM-4076. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that e-way bill was generated at 09.28 pm on 18.01.2021 for supplying goods to Idukki district and the vehicle left the factory on 19.01.2021. But there was break down which resulted in stoppage of that trip. It is further submitted that the vehicle could continue its journey only on 20.01.2021 and was checked at Adimali, which resulted in issuing notices at Exts.P1, P2 and P3, by which goods were detained. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that because of break down, the journey could not be continued in pursuant to the e-way bill. It is argued that within the statutory time limit, the journey started and therefore, the impugned action is not justifiable. 4. As against this, the learned Government pleader drew my attention to Rule 138 of the GST Rules and argued that....