Login | Register
GST Library
TaxReply Support
YouTube Videos
Twitter
Buy Premium Tax Domains
About Us
Contact Us
Our Services
TaxReply India Pvt Ltd

GST Case Laws


TaxReply Citation TAXREPLY
Court
High Court
State
Search by Related Tags
  OR

  OR

  OR
Date (From)
Date (To)
Name of Party
Text Search
Text Search option

  13,207 Results

M/S. NAGRI EYE RESEARCH FOUNDATION


(Authority for Advance Ruling, Gujrat | May 19, 2020)

The applicant vide their application for Advance Ruling has submitted that they are a Charitable Trust and are running a medical store where medicines are given at a lower rate and the motive of the trust is not profit; that under GST law, the taxing provision is in Section 9 which levies tax on intra-state supply of goods or service or both and the scope of supply is defined in Section-7 which is reproduced hereunder: Section-7 (1) for the purposes of this Act, the expression “supp...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

SHREE DIPESH ANILKUMAR NAIK


(Authority for Advance Ruling, Gujrat | May 19, 2020)

BRIEF FACTS The applicant has submitted that he is having a vacant land outside the municipal area of town on which he has some proposed business activity. The applicant is having all the necessary approvals for the proposed project from the Plan Passing Authority (i.e. Jilla Panchayat). 2. The applicant has further submitted that as per the Plan Passing Authority, the seller of land is required to develop the primary amenities like Sewerage and drainage line, Water line, Electricity ...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

SH. RAHUL SHARMA, M/S. LOCAL CIRCLES INDIA PVT. LT.. vs. M/S. TANYA ENTERPRISES


(National Anti Profiteering Authority | May 19, 2020)

ORDER 1. This Report dated 24.09.2019 has been received from the Director General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP) after a detailed investigation under Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods & Service Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017. The brief facts of the case are that the Standing Committee on Anti-profiteering vide its communication dated 11.03.2019 had requested the DGAP to conduct a detailed investigation as per Rule 129 (1) of the above Rules on the allegation that M/s. Vini Cosmetics Pvt. Ltd. ha...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
ORDER 1. The present report dated 26.09.2018, has been received from the Director-General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP) after a detailed investigation under Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods & Service Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017. The brief facts of the case are that the Applicant No. 1 vide the minutes of it’s meeting held on 08.05.2018 had referred the present case to the Standing Committee on Anti-profiteering, alleging profiteering by the Respondent on the supply of “Food Proc...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
ORDER This matter is taken up for hearing through Video-Conferencing mode. 2. These writ petitions are filed challenging the demand notices issued by the respondent dated 10.03.2020 and 13.03.2020 respectively. 3. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that these writ petitions are filed challenging the demand notices issued in pursuant to the orders of assessment passed relevant to the assessment years 2017-2018, 2018- 2019 and 2019-2020. It is further contende...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

SH. RAHUL KUMAR vs. M/S EMAAR MGF LAND LTD.


(National Anti Profiteering Authority | May 15, 2020)

1. The present Report dated 24.09.2019 has been received from the Applicant No. 2 i.e. the Director General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP) after detailed investigation under Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods &Service Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017. The brief facts of the case are that vide his application dated 07.01.2019 filed before the Standing Committee on Anti-profiteering under Rule 128 (1) of the CGST Rules, 2017, the Applicant No. 1 had alleged profiteering by the Respondent in respect of pu...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
This appeal has been filed under Section 107 of the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 by M/s Aadhaar Wholesale Trading & Distribution Limited, Plot No:2, Jagdish Marg, Bani Park, Jaipur-302016 (Raj) (hereinafter also referred to as ‘the appellant’) against Order-in-Original No. EWB-04 dated 21.02.2019 (hereinafter referred to as “the impugned order”) passed by Joint Commissioner, Central Goods & Service Tax Division-F, Sector-10, Vidhyadhar Nagar, Jaipur (hereina...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

M/S. KSC BUILDCON PRIVATE LIMITED


(Authority for Advance Ruling, Rajasthan | May 14, 2020)

Note: Under Section 100 of the CGST/RGST Act, 2017, an appeal against this ruling lies before the Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling constituted under section 99 of CGST/RGST Act, 2017, within a period of 30 days from the date of service of this order. At the outset, we would like to make it clear that the provisions of both the CGST Act and the RGST Act are the same except for certain provisions. Therefore, unless a mention is specifically made to such dissimilar provisions, a re...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

M/S ARG ELECTRICALS PVT. LTD.


(Authority for Advance Ruling, Rajasthan | May 14, 2020)

Note: Under Section 100 of the CGST/RGST Act, 2017, an appeal against this ruling lies before the Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling constituted under section 99 of CGST/RGST Act, 2017, within a period of 30 days from the date of service of this order. At the outset, we would like to make it clear that the provisions of both the CGST Act and the RGST Act are the same except for certain provisions. Therefore, unless a mention is specifically made to such dissimilar provisions, a refere...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
This appeal has been filed before the appellate authority under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 by M/s. Sanganeriya Spinning Mills Limited, 15-A, RIICO Industrial ‘Area, Neemrana, District-Alwar-301705 (Rajasthap) (hereinafter also referred to as “the appellant”) against the Order-in-Original No. DRC-07 issued vide C.No.V(GST)/400/Sanganeriya/Dem/2018/140 dated 23.01.2019 (hereinafter called as the “impugned order”) passed by the Assist...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in


17
May
S
M
T
W
T
F
S
20 May

☑ Monthly | GSTR-3B

GSTR-3B for the m/o Apr 2025 (Monthly Taxpayer - Rule 61) - Either Compulsory taxpayer > 5 cr. or Voluntary taxpayer < 5 cr.

☑ Monthly | GSTR-5A

GSTR-5A for the m/o Apr 2025 [Return by OIDAR Service Providers - Rule 64.]

25 May

☑ Monthly | PMT-06

PMT-06 Monthly tax payment for Apr 2025 under QRMP Scheme [Rule 61(1)(ii) - Proviso to Section 39(7)].

Taxpayers have a choice to pay tax either, as per -  

A) Fixed Sum Method OR 
B) Self assessment basis subject to interest on short payment of taxes.
(Notification No.85/2020 - CT)
 
28 May

☑ Monthly | GSTR-11

GSTR-11 for the m/o Apr 2025 (Statement of inward supplies by persons having Unique Identification Number (UIN)).