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

  13,262 Results

NEXTURE TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD.


(Authority for Advance Ruling, Maharashtra | Jun 1, 2019)

PROCEEDINGS (Under Section 98 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017) The present application has been filed under section 97 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 [hereinafter referred to as “the CGST Act and MGST Act”] by M/s. Nexture Technologies Private Limited, the applicant, seeking an advance ruling in respect of the following questions. D...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

MAYANK JAIN


(Authority for Advance Ruling, Maharashtra | Jun 1, 2019)

PROCEEDINGS (Under section 98 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017) The present application has been filed under section 97 of the Central Goods and Service Tax, 2017 and the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 [hereinafter referred to as “the CGST Act and MGST Act”] by Mayank Jain, the applicant, seeking an advance ruling in respect of the following questions. 1) Whether the Marketing services to...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

SHAIKH AYUB SHAIKH ALI (AMOODI PLAST)


(Authority for Advance Ruling, Maharashtra | Jun 1, 2019)

PROCEEDINGS (under section 98 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017) The present application has been filed under section 97 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 [hereinafter referred to as “the CGST and MGST Act”] by Shaikh Ayub Shaikh Ali, Trade name of applicant is Amoodi Plast, the applicant, seeking an advance ruling in res...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
1. The Oudh Bar Association, High Court Lucknow Bench has preferred the instant writ petition filed in public interest by invoking writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for a writ of certiorari quashing the letter/proposal dated 15.03.2019 written by the Addl. Chief Secretary to the Finance Secretary, with regard to constituting the GST Tribunal at Prayagraj. Petitioner interalia has also sought for a direction to the respondents to constitute/est...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

V.K BROTHERS vs. UNION OF INDIA AND 4 OTHERS


(Allahabad High Court | May 31, 2019)

ORDER Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri M.C. Tripathi, learned counsel for the respondent nos.1,2 and 3 and Sri R.C. Shukla, learned counsel for the respondent no.4. The petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus directing the GST council respondent no.2 to make recommendations to the Commissioner to extend the time period for filing of GST Tran-1 in the case of the petitioner because his application was not entertained on the last date i.e. 27.12.2017 and he is permitted to fil...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
Order Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that in the writ petition being DBCW No.4811/19, this Court while issuing notices to the respondents has granted interim order in favour of the petitioner therein. Issue notice. Issue notice of stay petition. Notices are made returnable in six weeks; be given dasti to learned counsel for the petitioner for service upon the respondents. In the meanwhile, the respondents are directed to provisionally entertain the GST TRAN-1...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
ORDER We have heard Mr Vinayak Mithal, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr Gaurav Mahajan, learned counsel for the Department, Mr A. K. Tiwari, Advocate for the respondents no. 1, 2 & 3 and perused the material on record. The grievance of the petitioner is that he had applied manually before the respondents for processing of GST TRAN-I form but his application has been rejected due to which he is likely to suffer loss of the credit. Considering the facts and circumstances o...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

GOVIND ENTERPRISES vs. STATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS


(Allahabad High Court | May 30, 2019)

Instant petition seeks quashing of first information report (for short FIR), dated 30.11.2018, lodged by Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Tax at police station Kosi Kalan, District Mathura, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 34, 120-B IPC. The impugned FIR alleges that M/s Govind Enterprises (the petitioner) applied for registration under the U.P. Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short U.P. Act) to conduct business in packing material, by showing its place of business on ...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
ORDER We have heard Mr Vinayak Mithal, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr Gaurav Mahajan, learned counsel for the Department, Mr K. J. Shukla, Advoate for the respondents no. 1, 2 & 3 and perused the material on record. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner prays for correction in the Cause Title as well as in the writ petition by incorporating cause title name of the petitioner as "M/s Shunti Bunty Automobiles Pvt Ltd" in place of "M/s Shunti Bunty ...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
Two jurisdictional errors of a fatal nature have been brought before the Court in this petition. Service has been effected on the principal respondents. The respondent nos. 1 to 9 are represented. Mr. Bhattacharya, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners, very concisely points out that the exercise of power by the respondent no. 8 who is below the rank of the Joint Commissioner in the case of such seizure and other acts under Section 67(2) are wholly without jurisdictio...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in


20
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)).