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

  12,950 Results

ORDER The petitioner is before this Court in these Writ Petitions against the impugned assessment orders, dated 22.06.2023 passed by the respondent for the assessment years 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2019-20. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner's mother namely, D.Parvatham, was proprietrix of M/s.Parvathaa Exports and that she died on 13.05.2023. However, the impugned orders have been passed on 22.06.2023 in the name of the petitioner's mother, who was carrying o...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

RANA CHOWDHURY vs. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & OTHERS


(Calcutta High Court | Apr 29, 2024)

ORDER 1. The present writ application has been filed, inter alia, challenging the order of cancellation of registration of the petitioner under the WBGST Act, 2017 Hereinafter referred to as the “said Act”. 2. It is the petitioner’s case that on or about 26th November 2021 the petitioner was served with a notice of show cause as to why the registration of the petitioner under the said Act shall not be cancelled for the petitioner having failed to file his returns for...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
ORDER By asserting that the petitioner was unaware of proceedings culminating in the impugned order since the notices and orders were uploaded on the “View Additional Notices and Orders” tab on the GST portal and not communicated to the petitioner through any other mode, the present writ petition was filed impugning order dated 11.10.2023. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the tax proposal pertains to the discrepancy between the petitioner's GSTR 3B re...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
ORDER The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition against the impugned order dated 10.07.2023 passed by the respondent in his proceedings bearing reference No.GSTIN 33AJFPK0790D1ZL/2020-21. 2. By the impugned order, the respondent has levied the interest and penalty under Section 74 (9) of the TNGST Act, 2017. Relevant portion of the impugned order is under: “e) A personal hearing also been issued on 23.11.2022 in the reference 3rd cited. The taxpayer not responded to the Sh...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
ORDER Mr.R.Suresh Kumar, learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice for the respondents. 2. The petitioner has filed this writ petition for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to quash the order passed by the first respondent in Na.Ka.No.A1/1528/2023 dated 19.01.2024, to condone the delay of 34 days in filing the appeal, to direct the first respondent to admit the appeal against the assessment order dated 12.06.2023 for the year of 2021-22 and to direct the third respondent to p...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

SWASTIK ENTERPRISES vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS


(Delhi High Court | Apr 29, 2024)

JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL) 1. Petitioner impugns order dated 21.12.2023 whereby the impugned Show Cause Notice dated 28.09.2023 proposing a demand of Rs 10,85,557.20/- against the petitioner has been disposed of and demand including penalty has been raised against the petitioner. The order has been passed under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). 2. Annexure to the impugned order dated 21.12.2023 has been produ...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
ORDER The petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 30.11.2023 passed by the respondent for the Assessment Year 2017-2018 in his proceedings bearing reference No.GSTIN/33AAGCS7439C1ZG/2017-18 in Form DRC-07. 2. By the impugned order, the respondent has ordered for recovery of Rs. 25,16,22,353/- as detailed below in the recovery notice dated 25.04.2024 bearing reference No.A3/123/2024 of the respondent herein:- TAX: IGST : ...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
ORDER 1. An assessment order dated 09.05.2023 is challenged in this Writ Petition on the ground that the Petitioner's reply dated 01.03.2023 was not duly taken into account 2. The Petitioner assails the impugned order by contending that he is a provider of goods carriage services and had purchased vehicles for carrying the goods. Consequently, the Petitioner states that he was entitled to avail of the benefit of input tax credit. Upon receipt of the intimation dated 07.12.2022, by...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

KALIDAS MEDICAL STORE vs. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER


(Allahabad High Court | Apr 29, 2024)

ORDER 1. Heard Shri Ajay Kumar Yadav along with Shri Siddharth Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Ankur Agarwal, learned Standing Counsel for the State. 2. Challenge has been raised to the adjudication order dated 28.12.2023 passed under Section 73(9) of the U.P. G.S.T Act, 2017. Two objections have been raised. First, it has been submitted that the adjudicating authority has traveled beyond the scope of adjudication notice inasmuch as against show cause notice issued ...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
COMMON ORDER Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 2. In these Writ Petitions, the petitioner has challenged the impugned orders both dated 31.12.2023 and 05.01.2024 for the Assessment Years 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 respectively, on the ground that there is violation of principles of natural justice, inasmuch as the amounts that were paid by the petitioner have also been ignored and tax has been confirmed on the petitioner in terms of the proposals contained in DRC-01 is...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in


28
Apr
S
M
T
W
T
F
S
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)