The Kerala High court discarding the petition held that used personal cars are privileged from the need of the GST e-way bill 
Get to know about GST E Way bill and its generating process through online and SMS in a simple manner. Also, we have attached original screenshots of official E way bill portal for better understanding beneath rule 138(14)(a) of the Kerala Goods and services tax rules 2017.
Justice S.V Bhatti and Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas stated that the Single Judge’s decision permitted the appeal that challenged the delay of the used cars urged by the petitioner.
The respondent in the petitioner has approached the single bench and is not satisfied through the detention of the Range Rover vehicle through the petitioner while it was transported from Coimbatore to Thiruvananthapuram.
Beneath rule 138 the vehicle is transported without any e-way bill said by the GST department. But the single judge has permitted the applicant to suppress the detention order of the petitioner and released the vehicle. The GST council said to the division bench.
The court while hearing the appeal stated that the only cause for the detaining of the goods was that it was transported through the e-way bill. The attention was indeed drawn towards the court that the owner of the vehicle has furnished that the applied IGST on the buyings and it has run 43 km prior to its reveal. Upon the same the bench sees that:
“It must be remembered that goods that are classifiable as used personal and household effect falls under Rule 138(14) (a) of the Kerala Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 and are exempted from the requirement of e-way bill.”
Read Also: Blocking/Unblocking in E-Way Bill for GST Return Non-filers 
Know the details on blocking and unblocking e-way bill feature for non-filers of GST return. Also, we solved general queries through important frequently asked questions
Moreover, the dependence was put down through the bench on the decision of KUN Motor Company Private Ltd & Ors v. Assistant State Tax Officer [(2019) 60 GSRT 144 (Kerala)] in which it stated that “The goods having come into the possession of the purchaser, and the vehicle having been used, however negligible the distance run, it is his used personal effect and there can be alleged no taxable transaction.”
Hence the court besides accepting the mentioned decision stated that the old vehicles do come under the ‘used personal effects’ even if their run is negligible. Seeking for no merit in the appeal it was dismissed through the division bench.
The senior government pleader Mohammed Rafiq supported the petitioner for the concern while Advocate A Kumar represented the respondents.
“Case Title: Assistant State Tax Officer (Intelligence) v. VST & Sons”
