^®
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. |

GATI KINTETSU EXPRESS PVT. LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAX OF MP & OTHERS
(Madhya Pradesh High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

P.K. JAISWAL
S.K. AWASTHI

Pet. Counsel

Vivek Dalal

Res. Counsel

Archana Kher

Petitioner / Applicant	GATI KINTETSU EXPRESS PVT. LTD.
Respondent	COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAX OF MP & OTHERS
Court	Madhya Pradesh High Court
State	Madhya Pradesh
Date	Jul 5, 2018
Order No.	W.P. No. 12399 of 2018
Citation	2018(7) TAXREPLY 2954
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
By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is praying for quashment of order dated 30.05.2018 passed by the respondent No.2 – GST Appellate Authority & Joint Commissioner of State Tax, Indore and order dated 04.05.2018 passed by the respondent No.3 - Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Indore wherein demand and penalty imposed by the respondent No.3 has been upheld and directed the petitioner to pay the amount of ₹ 1,32,13,683/-. Relevant part of the order dated 04.05.2018 passed by the respondent No.3 reads as under :- 2. This order has been challenged by filing an appeal before the respondent No.2. The respondent No.2 vide impugned order dated 30.05.2018 came to the conclusion that the petitioner has violated the provisions of Section 68 r/w Rule 138 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 and M. P. Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 and dismissed the appeal. 3. Facts of the case are that the petitioner i....