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

  13,223 Results

BHARAT VIJAY TRANSPORT CO. vs. STATE OF GUJARAT


(Gujarat High Court | May 3, 2019)

1. Heard Mr. Varis Isani, learned advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Soaham Joshi, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents. 2. In this case when the conveyance in question was apprehended it was carrying goods under 31 bills and lorry receipts, out of which in case of 22 bill and lorry receipts the goods were released immediately; in case of nine defective bills and lorry receipts, seven of the concerned tax payers had paid the tax and penalty, pursuant to which the good...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

JHV STEELS LTD vs. UNION OF INDIA AND 4 OTHERS


(Allahabad High Court | May 3, 2019)

Heard Sri Aloke Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri R.C. Shukla and Shri Anant Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the respondents. The petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus directing the GST council respondent no.2 to make recommendations to the State Government 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 has filed his complete application for the necessary ...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

MAGS GARMENTS PVT. LTD. vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS


(Himachal Pradesh High Court | May 3, 2019)

ORDER CMP No.3280 of 2019 This application seeks to recall order dated 31st December, 2018, whereby the writ petition was disposed of, substantially on the basis of consent order, to the effect that the impugned order was appealable under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (for short, “the Act”). 2. In the instant application, the respondent Authorities have submitted that actually no appeal under Section 107 of the Act is maintainable. In our c...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
ORDER The petitioner has challenged the constitutional validity of Section 96(2) of the Rajasthan Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (for short, ‘the RGST Act’) and Section 96 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short, ‘the CGST Act’) to the extent they prescribe for constitution of the Authority for Advance Ruling (for short, ‘AAR’) consisting of members from amongst the officers of Central tax and the officers of State tax, and Rule 103 ...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

GGL HOTEL AND RESORT COMPANY LIMITED


(Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, West Bengal | May 3, 2019)

1. This Appeal has been filed by the GGL Hotel and Resort Company Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “the Appellant”) on 06.02.2019 against Advance Ruling No. 30/WBAAR/2018-19 dated 08.01.2019, pronounced by the West Bengal Authority for Advance Ruling in the matter of the M/s. GGL Hotel and Resort Company Ltd. 2. GGL Hotel and Resort Company Ltd. located at Vishwakarma Building, 80C Topsia Road Kolkata- 700046, holding GSTIN 19AABCG6133G1ZQ, stated to be a subsidiary of Am...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

PACIFIC QUARTZ SURFACES LLP


(Authority for Advance Ruling, Rajasthan | May 3, 2019)

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

SANGHI BROTHERS (INDORE) PRIVATE LIMITED


(Authority for Advance Ruling, Madhya Pradesh | May 3, 2019)

PROCEEDINGS (Under sub-section (4) of Section 98 of Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 and the Madhya Pradesh Goods & Service Tax Act, 2017) 1. The present application has been filed u/s 97 of the Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017 and MP Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter also referred to CGST Act and SGST Act respectively) by M/s. Sanghi Brothers(Indore) Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as the Applicant) , registered under the Goods & S...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND & OTHERS


(Uttarakhand High Court | May 2, 2019)

Heard Mr. M.P. Devanath, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Vikas Pande, learned Standing Counsel for the State, and, with their consent, this appeal is being disposed of at the stage of admission. 2. The jurisdiction of this Court was invoked by the appellant-writ petitioner-a cement manufacturing unit-seeking a writ of certiorari to quash the Circular dated 02.01.2018; a writ of mandamus to quash the conditions imposed at Sl. Nos.12 and 13 of the Circular dated 02.01.2018 by hold...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
ORAL ORDER 1. The present application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for regular bail in connection with arrest memo dated 18.3.2019 and F.No.DGCEI/AZU/12(4)73/2018-19 issued under Section 69 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. 2. Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that considering the nature of the offence, the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable conditions. 3. Learned APP appea...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

GLOBE AGENCIES vs. UNION OF INDIA AND 5 OTHERS


(Allahabad High Court | May 2, 2019)

ORDER Heard Sri Aditya Pandey learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Devendra Gupta who appears for respondent no.1 to 3, Shri R.C. Shukla learned counsel for the respondent no.4 and 5 and learned standing counsel for the respondent no.6. The petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus directing the GST council respondent no.2 to make recommendations to the State Government to extend the time period for filing of GST Tran-2 in the case of the petitioner because his application was not entert...
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)).