^®
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. |

VEER PRATAB SINGH vs. STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS
(Kerala High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR

Pet. Counsel

K.p.pradeep

Hareesh M.r

T.t.biju

Res. Counsel

Thomas Mathew Nellimoottil

Petitioner / Applicant	VEER PRATAB SINGH
Respondent	STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS
Court	Kerala High Court
State	Kerala
Date	Nov 6, 2020
Order No.	WP (C). No. 22016 OF 2020 (B)
Citation	2020(11) TAXREPLY 3508
Add to Favorites	Add to favorites.
Download Original Order
Print (Full Page)
Print (Judgement Only)

Related Tags :

☍

Section 130

TaxGPT ^Beta

Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

AA |

ORDER
The petitioners are dealers, inter alia, in brass and copper scraps, having their business concern in Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu and Jamnagar, Gujarat, respectively. A consignment of scrap that was being transported from Coimbatore to Gujarat from the 1st petitioner, as consigner, to the 2nd petitioner, as consignee, was detained by the respondents at Kodumuda in Palakkad. The detention notice issued to the petitioners indicates that the reason for detention was that the documents that accompanied the transportation of the goods were found to be defective. The consignment in question was accompanied by a tax invoice and an e-way bill that showed payment of IGST as also that the transportation of the goods was from Coimbatore to Gujarat. The respondents, however, obtained evidence that suggested that the loading of the consignment was effected in Palakkad, within the State of Kerala, and not in Coimbatore. While the detention of the goods may have been justified on the said ground, and b....