Inter state movement of demo vehicles between distinct persons attracts GST


Last updated: 04 July 2023

Court :
Madhya Pradesh High Court

Brief :
The Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in M/s Kia Motors India Pvt. Ltd. v. The State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. [Writ Petition No. 20600 of 2020 dated May 1, 2023] dismissed the writ and held transporting demo vehicle from one state to another between distinct person attracts GST.

Citation :
Writ Petition No. 20600 of 2020 dated May 1, 2023

The Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in M/s Kia Motors India Pvt. Ltd. v. The State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. [Writ Petition No. 20600 of 2020 dated May 1, 2023] dismissed the writ and held transporting demo vehicle from one state to another between distinct person attracts GST.

Facts

M/s Kia Motors India Pvt. Ltd. ("the Petitioner") challenged an order passed by theAppellate Authority dated December 23, 2019 upholding the demand of tax and penalty pertaining to non-payment of GST on transporting demo vehicles from one state to another between distinct person.

The Petitioner contended that bringing demo vehicle into the State does not make transaction exigible to GST as there is no sale or purchase transaction taken place.

The Revenue Department contended that the Section 129 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 ("the CGST Act")r.w. Rule 138 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 ("the CGST Rules") the movement of goods exceeding value INR 50,000/- even if they do not fall under the definition of supply, becomes exigible to GST.

Issue

Whether movement of demo vehicles from one state to another between distinct person attracts GST?

Held

The Madhya Pradesh High Court in Writ Petition No. 20600 of 2020 held as under:

  • Noted that, as per Rule 138(1)(ii) of the CGST Rules, causing of movement of goods exceeding the value INR 50,000/- even if the reason is not related to supply would requires taxpayer to fill Form-A GST, EWB-01 on the common portal along-with necessary information.
  • Further noted that, the Petitioner has not provided any information which is mandatory as per Rule 138(1) of the CGST Rules.
  • Held that, transportation of demo vehicles from one state to another between distinct persons is exigible to GST.
  • Dismissed the petition after finding no fault in order of Appellate Authority.
     
 

Bimal Jain
Published in GST
Views : 298

Comments




CCI Pro

Follow us
add to google news


Company
ARTICLESHIP 30 June 2026
Article Assistant or Paid Assistant

VIKAS VERMA & CO

New Delhi

Others

View Details
Company
14 July 2026
Senior Executive/ Manager

H S SHARMA AND CO

Pune

CA Final

View Details
Company
ARTICLESHIP 28 June 2026
Article Assistant

Sharma Chetan And Company

Gurgaon

CA Inter

View Details
Company
ARTICLESHIP 15 July 2026
CA Articles

Kinjal H Shah & Co.

Mumbai

CA Foundation

View Details
Company
25 June 2026
Accounts & Taxation Executive

Dindukurthy & Associates

Hyderabad

MBA

View Details
Company
ARTICLESHIP 27 June 2026
Article

SNCO

Mumbai

CA Inter

View Details
Company
24 June 2026
Senior Account (VA Client Operations)

Karbon Business

Bengaluru

CA Inter

View Details
Company
ARTICLESHIP 16 July 2026
CA Article

Pipara & Co. LLP.

Mumbai

CA Inter

View Details