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

  12,903 Results

ORAL JUDGMENT   (PER M.S. SONAK J.) :- 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Rule. The Rule is made returnable immediately at the request of and with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. 3. Learned counsel for the parties agree that the issues raised in this Petition are identical to the issues that were involved in Writ Petition No. 4500 of 2024 which was disposed of by us by our order dated 11 October 2024. 4. Accordingly, based on the reasonin...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
ORDER HON'BLE PIYUSH AGRAWAL,J. Heard Mr. Jasmeet Singh along with Mr. Vipul Dube for the petitioner and Mr. Amit Mahajan for respondent nos. 2 and 3. Mr. Abrar Ahmad has filed memo of appearance on behalf of respondent no. 1, Union of India. With the consent of parties, the present petition is being decided finally at the admission stage, without calling any pleadings. The present writ petition has been filed inter alia for the following reliefs: "a. Issue a writ...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

MEHUL MAMGAIN vs. UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS


(Delhi High Court | Oct 16, 2024)

ORDER 1. This writ petition has been preferred seeking the following reliefs:- “A. Kindly be pleased to allow the Writ Petition (Civil) under the aegis of Article 226 of the Constitution of India and be pleased to issue Writ of Mandamus or alike directions upon the Respondent No. 1 i.e., The Principal Chief Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise, Delhi Zone and Respondent No. 2 i.e., Principal Commissioner (State Tax – GST), Government of NCT of Delhi, Department of Tra...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
ORDER COMMON ORDER (per Hon’ble SP,J) Sri Prasad Paranjape, learned counsel represents Sri A.V.A. Siva Kartikeya, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Swaroop Oorilla, learned Special Government Pleader for State Tax, appeared for the respondents. 2. Regard being had to the similitude of the questions involved, on the joint request, matters are analogously heard and decided by this common order. 3. The facts are taken from W.P.No.22694 of 2024. 4. The bone of c...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
COMMON ORDER These writ petitions are filed challenging the impugned orders issued by the respondent in GSTIN No.33AAALZ0205G1ZE for the assessment years 2017-18; 2018-19; 2019-2020; 2020-21; 2021-22 and 2022-23, dated 20.07.2023, whereby, the petitioner admittedly a processing plant / facility of Nuclear Fuel Complex ("NFC"), Hyderabad has been subject to tax on the alleged services rendered to Nuclear Fuel Complex, Hyderabad. 2.The challenge is primarily on the premise tha...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA) 1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Sahil J. Rao for the petitioner learned advocate Ms. Nidhi Vyas for respondent No. 2 and 3. 2. By this petition under Articles 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs: “5.2 That Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ and quash and set aside the order No. ORDER-INAPPEAL No. VAD-CGST-002-AP...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

MATANGI TRADERS vs. THE JOINT COMMR CT


(Andhra Pradesh High Court | Oct 16, 2024)

COMMON ORDER: PER HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO As the issues raised in all these Writ Petitions are one and the same and they are being disposed of by way of this Common Order. 2. In all these cases, the petitioners are dealers dealing with Sodium Bicarbonate (Soda Ash) and Magnesium Sulphate (Epsom Salt). 3. All the petitioners, while being assessed under the Andhra Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 [for short “the APGST Act”] had claimed th...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
ORDER The petitioner, which is involved in Real Estate Business had registered itself under the GST Act and had been filing returns and paying applicable taxes. However, the petitioner had not filed its returns nor paid any taxes from the year 2020. On account of non filing of returns and non payment of taxes, the respondent authorities had initially issued a show cause notice dated 25.08.2020, proposing to cancel the registration of the petitioner and had thereafter passed an order of ca...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
ORDER PER 1. The instant writ petition had been preferred for the framing of an appropriate direction commanding the respondents to release the refunds as claimed by the writ petitioner and as a consequence of the Order-in-Appeal dated 18 October 2022. 2. Undisputedly, that Order-in-Appeal has neither been questioned nor assailed by the respondents. 3. Pursuant to the notice, which was issued on the instant writ petition, a reply has been filed by the Deputy Commissioner concerned...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
P.C. :- 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This petition challenges the order dated 25 August 2023 made by the State Tax Officer demanding tax, interest, and penalty from the petitioner. 3. The petitioner instituted an appeal against this order on 25 May 2024, claiming that he learned of this order only on 21 March 2024 when his bank received a notice from the State Tax Officer under Section 79 (1) for remittance of the amount demanded under the impugned order dated 25 A...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in


25
Apr
S
M
T
W
T
F
S
25 Apr

☑ Half-Yearly | ITC-04

ITC-04 for the half year (Oct - Mar 2025) (For taxpayers > 5 Cr. Turnover) - Rule 45.

☑ Annual | ITC-04

ITC-04 for complete FY 2024-25 (For taxpayers <= 5 Cr. Turnover) - Rule 45.

28 Apr

☑ Monthly | GSTR-11

GSTR-11 for the m/o Mar 2025 (Statement of inward supplies by persons having Unique Identification Number (UIN)).

30 Apr

☑ Quarterly | QRMP

Last date for opt-in / opt-out QRMP Scheme for quarter Apr - June 2025 (Rule 61A)