No E-Way bill if transportation of
personal effects:HC

Facts of the case:

 An individual purchased a car from a dealer in Puducherry and got the vehicle
temporarily registered in Puducherry and entrusted it to the dealer to transport it
to Thiruvananthapuram on payment of transport charges.

 On the above transaction IGST was charged. However, the car was detained in
Kerala for want of E-way Bill.

 The applicant filled the appeal with the kerala High Court
Held:
Following grounds were considered by the Court:

 Mere transportation charges the transaction cannot said inter-State. For ex A
purchase of, say, a Television by a resident of Kerala from Bangalore would
be an intra-State sale and the nature of the supply, whether it be an inter-
state or intra-State, would not depend on whether the purchaser carries it as a
head-load through the borders or transports it through his own conveyance
or through a transporter.”

 According to the division bench, the incidence of the tax is on the supply
and not on the nature of transport.

 According to bench “We hence are of the opinion that the supply of the
new vehicle by its authorized dealer terminated on it being purchased by the
2nd appellant in Puthuchery and the subsequent movement of the goods was
not occasioned by reason of the transaction of supply.

 The goods have come into the possession of the purchaser, and the vehicle
having been used, however negligible the distance run, Bench also of the
opined that it is his “used personal effect” and there can be alleged no
taxable transaction in so far as the movement of goods from Puthuchery to

Trivandrum in Kerala, especially since the car had been registered in the
name of the purchaser,” the bench said.

 “Though a temporary registration, it has to be noticed that there is absolutely
no enabling provision, though also no prohibition, in getting a permanent
registration of the vehicle by yet another person.

 The bench also added that “a second sale of the motor vehicle is not taxable
within the State, unless there is a premium on the original sale price as seen
from Notification No.8/2018 Central Tax-(Rate)”.

 Hence on these two grounds, of an intra-State sale having occasioned and
the transport being of used personal effects, we find that the detention was
illegal,” the bench added.