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

JUDGMENT The petitioner is a Public Limited Company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956. It is engaged in financing, providing personal and business loans upon the security of gold. For the period from April 2017 to June 2017, the petitioner had filed returns under the provisions of the Finance Act, 1994 disclosing payment of Service Tax of Rs.10,36,39,987/- Education Cess (EC) amounting to Rs.67,69,195/-, Secondary and Higher Education Cess (SHEC) amounting to Rs...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
JUDGMENT ARINDAM SINHA, J. 1. Mr. Ghosh, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and submits, his client dispatched goods to the consignee upon them having been purchased. E-Way bill was generated on 6th August, 2024 to enable the goods being transported from his client to the buyer in West Bengal, whose instruction was to ship to the consignee in Chhattisgarh. The goods vehicle was seized on 7th August, 2024. Notice in Form GST Mov-07 dated 14th August, 2024 was served on dr...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

SIEMENS LTD. vs. UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS


(Bombay High Court | Sep 3, 2024)

P.C. : 1. This Petition is impugning an Order-in-Appeal dated 22nd February 2024 (issued on 27th February 2024) passed by respondent No. 2. By the said Order-in-Appeal, petitioner’s appeal was dismissed on the following grounds: (i) that the Petitioner has not submitted Board Resolution appointing the Authorized Signatory to sign Appeal documents under Companies Act, 1956; (ii) that the Authorized Signatory has not put her name under her signature; (iii) that there was a...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
1. Affidavit-of-service, filed in Court today, is taken on record. 2. Mr. Jagriti Mishra, learned counsel appears for the petitioner. 3. Ms. Rima Sarkar, learned State counsel appears for the respondent nos. 1 to 3. 4. The rest of the respondents are not represented. 5. The petitioner has carried out certain infrastructural construction work under the Pradhan Mantri Gramin Sadak Yojna at the behest of the respondent nos. 4 to 6. At the relevant point of time when the petitione...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
VIBHU BAKHRU, J. (ORAL) 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, impugning an order dated 08.10.2021 (hereafter the impugned order), whereby the petitioner’s Goods and Services Tax (GST) registration was cancelled with retrospective effect from 01.07.2017. 2. The impugned order was passed pursuant to the Show Cause Notice dated 26.08.2021 (hereafter the impugned SCN), whereby the petitioner was called upon to show cause why its GST registration not be cancel...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
VIBHU BAKHRU, J. (ORAL) 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, impugning an order dated 21.05.2024 (hereafter the impugned cancellation order) whereby the petitioner’s Goods and Services Tax (GST) registration was cancelled with retrospective effect from 03.07.2017. 2. The impugned cancellation order was passed pursuant to a Show Cause Notice dated 29.04.2024 (hereafter the impugned SCN). The only reason stated in the impugned SCN proposing to cancel the p...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
VIBHU BAKHRU, J. (ORAL) 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition impugning an order dated 02.09.2021 (hereafter the impugned order), whereby the petitioner’s GST registration was cancelled with retrospective effect from 07.07.2017. 2. The reason set out in the impugned order for cancelling the petitioner’s GST registration is that the petitioner had neither appeared for a personal hearing nor submitted any documents in its favour. The impugned order also records th...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

ARCHANA vs. STATE OF U.P. & OTHERS


(Allahabad High Court | Sep 3, 2024)

ORDER HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J. 1. Heard Sri Utkarsh Mishra and Abhisheka, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing for the State respondent. 2. The instant writ tax is being entertained by this Court in view of the fact that GST Tribunal is not functional in the State of U.P. Pursuant to the Gazette notification of the Central Government being No. CG-DL-E-14092023-248743 dated 14.9.2023. 3. By means of the present writ petition the petitioner has assailed the...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

AMIT PANDEY vs. THE UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS


(Supreme Court | Sep 2, 2024)

ORDER UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following. 1. Delay condoned. 2. We are not inclined to entertain the Special Leave Petition under Article 136 of the Constitution. 3. The Special Leave Petition is accordingly dismissed. 4. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of. ...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
ORDER ON BOARD 1. This writ petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the Joint Commissioner Appeal (State Tax) Bilaspur in an appeal case No. 60/GST/2022 dated 17.10.2022 in an appeal under Section 107 of the Chhattisgarh Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (for short 'the Act of 2017'). 2. The petitioner by way of this petition has prayed for the following reliefs:- 10.1 It is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an approp...
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)