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

  13,161 Results

In this batch of writ petitions the petitioners have questioned various assessment proceedings. The challenge is on either or both of these grounds that Section 174 of the KSGST Act is ultra vires of the State's legislative power; that the demand is barred by limitation under Section 25(1) of the KVAT Act. 2. All counsel now agree that the issues stand squarely covered against the petitioners by judgment dated 11th January 2019 in W.P.(C) No.11335 of 2018 and connected cases...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
The petitioner questions the Ext.P5 notice issued by the authorities under Section 25(1) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act. The authorities seem to have issued a notice even before the petitioner could have a copy of the judgment in a Writ Petition he filed challenging the constitutional vires of Section 174 of the Kerala State Goods and Services Tax Act, besides seeking other reliefs. 2. In response to the submissions made by the petitioner's counsel, the learned Government Pleader f...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
Could the transporter having no tax liability, for the goods transported, face detention, seizure and penalty, as provided under Section 129 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (“CGST Act” for brevity)?, is the question that arises for consideration in this appeal over WP(C) No.35665/2018 before us. 2. The facts in brief are thus: The petitioner is a transporting firm engaged in plying about 100 lorries as carriers of goods in India. On 15.10.2018, while the pe...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

IMS PROSCHOOL PVT. LTD.


(Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, Maharashtra | Feb 4, 2019)

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

IL & FS EDUCATION & TECHNOLOGY SERVICES LTD.


(Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, Maharashtra | Feb 4, 2019)

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 been filed under Section 100 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 [hereinafter ...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

TARALTEC SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD.


(Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, Maharashtra | Feb 4, 2019)

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

KERALA STATE SCREENING COMMITTEE ON ANTI-PROFITEEI.. vs. PULIMOOTTILL SILKS


(National Anti Profiteering Authority | Feb 4, 2019)

1. The present report dated 30.10.2018 has been received from the Directorate General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP) after detailed investigation under Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods & Services Tax(CGST) Rules, 2017. The brief facts of the case are that the Kerala State Screening Committee on Anti-profiteering, vide minutes of its 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 o...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

KERALA STATE SCREENING COMMITTEE ON ANIT-PROFITEEI.. vs. M/S SUDARSANS


(National Anti Profiteering Authority | Feb 4, 2019)

1. The present report dated 31.10.2018 has been received from the Directorate General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP) after detailed investigation under Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods & Services Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017. The brief facts of the case are that the Kerala State Screening Committee on Anti-profiteering, vide the minutes of its 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 sup...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
The petitioner was a registered dealer under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, now migrated to the Goods and Services Tax regime. To use the input tax available to its credit at the time of migration, the petitioner had to upload FORM GST TRAN-1 within the stipulated time. It asserts that though the petitioner attempted to upload it within the time, it failed because of some system error. The petitioner, therefore, seeks directions to enable him to take credit of the available input tax. 2....
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
The petitioner, a registered dealer under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, has now migrated to the Goods and Services Tax regime. To use the input tax available to its credit at the time of migration, the petitioner had to upload FORM GST TRAN-1 within the stipulated time. The petitioner asserts that though it attempted to upload form within the time, it failed because of some system error. The petitioner, therefore, seeks directions to enable him to take credit of the available input tax. ...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in


15
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)).