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

ARIHANT ENTERPRISES


(Authority for Advance Ruling, Maharashtra | Mar 19, 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 ARIHANT ENTERPRISES, the applicant, seeking an advance ruling in respect of the following questions. 1. Whether supply of ic...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

S.S. CEMTECH vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS


(Punjab and Haryana High Court | Mar 18, 2019)

1. This writ petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeking declaration that notification dated 16.2.2019 (Annexure P-6) is not applicable to the goods already entered into India on or before 16.2.2019 and bill of entry had already been filed. Further, a writ of mandamus has been sought directing respondent No.3 to release the goods without applying notification dated 16.2.2019. 2. The petitioner is importing different commodities from Pakistan. The pe...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

SENTHILKUMAR THILAGAVATHY (M/S. JVS TEX)


(Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, Tamilnadu | Mar 18, 2019)

Preamble 1. In terms of Section 102 of the Central Goods & Services Tax Act 2017 /Tamil Nadu Goods & Services Tax Act 2017 (“the Act”, in Short), this Order may be amended by the Appellate authority so as to rectify any error apparent on the face of the record, if such error is noticed by the Appellate authority on its own accord, or is brought to its notice by the concerned officer, the jurisdictional officer or the applicant within a period of six months from the dat...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

SANDVIK ASIA PVT. LTD.


(Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, Rajasthan | Mar 18, 2019)

At the outset, we would like to make it clear that provisions of both the Central GST Act, 2017 and Rajasthan GST Act, 2017 are same except for certain provisions. Therefore, unless a mention is specifically made to such dissimilar provisions, a reference to the Central GST Act would also mean a reference to the same provisions under Rajasthan GST Act. 2. The present appeal has been filed under Section 100 of the Central GST Act, 2017 (hereinafter also referred to as ‘CGST Act&rsquo...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
The petitioner in W.P(C) No.21355/2018 is challenging the judgment dated 11.01.2019. The respondents are the respondents in the writ petition. 2. Ext.P1 order of assessment was challenged in the writ petition, inter alia based on a contention that the assessment is barred under Section 25(1) of the Kerala Value Added Tax (KVAT) Act. There was also a challenge against the 101th amendment of the Constitution and the provision of Section 174 of the Kerala State Goods and Service Tax Act, 201...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
Since the controversy and facts involved in the aforesaid connected writ petitions are the same, therefore, they were heard together and are being decided by a common order with the consent of the parties. We had heard Sri Vinod Kumar Upadhyay, Senior Counsel, assisted by Sri Ritvik Upadhyay in Writ Tax Nos. 619 of 2018 and 618 of 2018 and Sri Shubham Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioner in Writ Tax Nos. 659 of 2018 & 1528 of 2018 and Sri C.B. Tripathi, learned counsel for the ...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
The petitioner by Ext. P4 made request before the first respondent to refund the wrongly paid CGST and SGST. The petitioner, apart from seeking a refund of the amount paid as above also have prayer for adjusting the said amount towards IGST. Anyway, I am of the view that a decision shall be taken on the request for refund of CGST and SGST within a period of one week. It is also open for the respondent to consider the request for adjusting the amount towards IGST as well. The writ petition...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
The petitioner approached this Court seeking for a direction to the respondents to allow him to submit GST TRAN-1 form claiming input tax as provided under 140(3) of the Central Act. It is submitted that on account of technical snag, they could not upload the details. Now it is submitted that by the Government of India notification dated 10.09.2018, the time is extended up to 31.03.2019. 2. In view of the above there is no difficulty for the petitioner to upload such details within the ab...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
Heard Sri Shubham Agrawal and Shri Alok Kumar, learned counsels for the petitioner and Shri Manish Goyal, learned Addl. Advocate General assisted by Sri C.B. Tripathi, learned standing counsel. The petitioners in all the above connected writ petitions are the Truck owners and are challenging the individual notices issued against them under section 130 of the U.P. Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (UPGST Act, 2017 for short) on the ground that they are only vehicle owners and are not doing ...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
On 13.03.2019, we passed the following order. "Petitioner has sought for a writ of declaration, declaring that Section 174 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, as ultra vires, to Section 19 of the Constitution (One Hundred and First Amendment) Act, 2016 and Articles 246 A, 269 A and 279 A of the Constitution of India and therefore, unenforceable and has no effect, in so far as the petitioner is concerned. 2. Inviting the attention of this Court to Section 19 of the Con...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in


18
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)).