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

  13,306 Results

M/S. SMT. ANJU PARAKH


(Authority for Advance Ruling, Chhatisgarh | Jan 21, 2020)

PROCEEDINGS [U/s 98 of the Chhattisgarh Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017 (herein- after referred to as CGGST Act, 2017)]  The applicant Smt. Anju Parakh, C-138, Sector-I, Devendra Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, GSTIN 22AESPP0220P1ZB has filed the application U/s 97 of the Chhattisgarh Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017 regarding GST applicability on Medical Services with regard to providing vaccination from clinic. The application filed by the applicant received on 11-09-2019 was...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

M/S. VAISHNAVI SPLENDOUR HOMEOWNERS WELFARE ASSOCI..


(Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, Karnataka | Jan 21, 2020)

PROCEEDINGS (Under Section 101 of the CGST Act, 2017 and the KGST Act, 2017) 1. At the outset we would like to make it clear that the provisions of CGST, Act 2017 and SGST, Act 2017 are in pari materia and have the same provisions in like matter and differ from each other only on a few specific provisions. Therefore, unless a mention is particularly made to such dissimilar provisions, a reference to the CGST Act would also mean reference to the corresponding similar provisio...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

M/S. SOMA MOHITE JOINT VENTURE


(Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, Maharashtra | Jan 20, 2020)

PROCEEDINGS (Under Section 101 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017) At the outset, we would like to make it clear that the provisions of both the CGST Act and the MGST Act are the same except for certain provisions. Therefore, unless a mention is specifically made to such dissimilar provisions, a reference to the CGST Act would also mean a reference to the same provisions under the MGST Act. The present appeal has be...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
The case set up in this writ petition (civil) are as follows: The petitioner would contend that he is a manufacturer of Polypropylene Matting and doing exports as well as domestic billing. The petitioner used to pay GST for the supplies made by them in accordance with law. Since the goods are exported out of India, the same are termed as 'Zero Rated Supply' in accordance with Section 16 of the IGST Act. According to the said provision, a registered person making 'Zero Rated Su...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
The case projected in this writ petition (civil) is as follows: - That, the petitioner is the labour contract society registered under the Societies Registration Act. It is a charitable society. The GST Intelligence seized the documents from the office of the petitioner evident from Ext.P1. The petitioner is providing man power and security guards to Government/semi Government Institutions. The respondent have issued notices withholding the payments of wages to the petitioner from those insti...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
The prayers in the above W.P.(C.) are as follows : (a) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction, directing the respondents to include the corrected details of Exhibits P6 to P9 through Exhibits P11 and P12 in the EDI system to enable the petitioner to get its refund; (b) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction directing the respondents to refund the IGST paid with interest from the date of Exhibts P6 to P10 shipping bi...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

JINDAL PIPES LIMITED vs. STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS


(Allahabad High Court | Jan 20, 2020)

Counter affidavit has been filed by the learned Standing Counsel. The same be kept on record. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, does not wish to file rejoinder affidavit. Certain goods were being transported from Ghaziabad to Ghazipur by a transporter namely M/s. Pragati Logistic Private Limited. However, as in the E-Way bill, which was prepared by the consignor at Ghaziabad from where the goods were being transported, the distance between Ghaziabad and Ghazipur had been stated...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

PARIDHI JAIN D/O SH. YOGESH JAIN vs. STATE, THROUGH PP


(Rajasthan High Court | Jan 20, 2020)

The present bail applications have been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner who is in custody in connection with F.I.R. No.205/2019, P.S. Udaimandir, District Jodhpur and FIR No.44/2019, P.S. GST (Goods & Service Tax) Department, District Jodhpur, for the offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC and Section 132[1][i] of Rajasthan Goods and Service Tax Act. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Advocate General appearing fo...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

M/S. INFINERA INDIA PVT. LTD.


(Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, Karnataka | Jan 20, 2020)

PROCEEDINGS (Under Section 101 of the CGST Act, 2017 and the KGST Act, 2017) 1. At the outset we would like to make it clear that the provisions of CGST, Act 2017 and SGST, Act 2017 are in pari materia and have the same provisions in like matter and differ from each other only on a few specific provisions. Therefore, unless a mention is particularIy made to such dissimilar provisions, a reference to the CGST Act would also mean reference to the corresponding Similar provisio...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

SUPER CONSTRUCTION CO. vs. STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS


(Allahabad High Court | Jan 18, 2020)

ORDER Counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent no. 3 and rejoinder affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioner in the Court today are taken on record. Heard Shri Naveen Chandra Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri C.B. Tripathi, learned Special Counsel for the State. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayer to :- "(I) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the detention order dated 31...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in


24
May
S
M
T
W
T
F
S
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)).