^®
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. |

REMARK FLOUR MILLS PVT. LTD. vs. STATE OF GUJARAT
(Gujarat High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

AKIL KURESHI
B.N. KARIA

Pet. Counsel

Kuntal A Parikh

Res. Counsel

Petitioner / Applicant	REMARK FLOUR MILLS PVT. LTD.
Respondent	STATE OF GUJARAT
Court	Gujarat High Court
State	Gujrat
Date	Apr 19, 2018
Order No.	Special Civil Application No. 4835 of 2018
Citation	2018(4) TAXREPLY 3079
Add to Favorites	Add to favorites.
Download Original Order
Print (Full Page)
Print (Judgement Only)

Related Tags :

☍

Section 74

☍

Section 83

TaxGPT ^Beta

Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

AA |

ORDER
Petitioners have challenged three separate actions of the departmental authorities, though all of them arise out of one integrated set of facts. 2. Briefly stated the facts are as under: Petitioner No.1 is a company registered under the Companies Act. Petitioner No.2 is one of its share holders. Petitioner-company is engaged in supply of wheat flour, meslin flour, cereal flour etc. Such activity would invite SGST and CGST at prescribed rates. However, even this is a matter of dispute between the two sides. 3. Case of the petitioners is that they are supplying such goods in packets which are branded as well as unbranded. According to the petitioners, the packings of more than 25 kgs are branded goods, the rest are unbranded. 4. On 20.02.2018, the departmental authorities visited the petitioners' work premises and noticed that the petitioners were not paying any tax either on branded or unbranded goods. According to the petitioners, under threat and coercion, the d....