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 An order dated 16.08.2023 is assailed on the ground of breach of principles of natural justice. 2. The petitioner is a registered person under applicable GST enactments. The petitioner asserts that the show cause notice and impugned order were uploaded on the “View Additional Notices and Orders” tab on the GST portal. It is further stated that the petitioner was unaware of proceedings because the notice and orders were not communicated to the petitioner through any o...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
ORDER An order dated 13.11.2023 is assailed on the ground that the petitioner did not have a reasonable opportunity to contest the tax demand on merits. The petitioner submits that he was unaware of proceedings culminating in the order impugned herein because such order was not communicated through any mode other than uploading on the GST portal. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the tax proposal pertains to the difference between the petitioner's GSTR 3B returns ...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

INDIAN ROCKS vs. THE STATE TAX OFFICER CHENNAI


(Madras High Court | Apr 23, 2024)

ORDER An order dated 31.10.2023 is challenged on the ground that the petitioner did not have a reasonable opportunity to contest the tax demand on merits. 2. The petitioner was engaged in the business of trading of granite, sand stones and allied products. The petitioner states that the GST registration was cancelled with effect from 31.05.2021. As a consequence, the petitioner asserts that he was unaware of proceedings culminating in the order impugned here in. 3. Learned counsel...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
COMMON ORDER In these three writ petitions, the petitioner assails separate orders dated 10.11.2023 pertaining to three different assessment periods. The petitioner asserts that he is engaged in the business of providing goods transport agency services, which are with in the reverse charge mechanism as per sub-section (3) of Section 9 of applicable GST enactments. Since the notices and the impugned order were uploaded on the GST portal, but not communicated through any other mode, the pet...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
ORDER An order in original dated 28.04.2023 is challenged on the ground that the petitioner did not have a reasonable opportunity to contest the tax demand on merits. 2. The petitioner asserts that the show cause notice and impugned order were uploaded on the GST portal, but not communicated to the petitioner through any other mode. Consequently, it is stated that the petitioner was unaware of these proceedings until he was informed by the respondents about alleged arrears relating to...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL) 1. Petitioner seeks a direction to the Respondents granting refund besides interest for the delayed refund. 2. As per the Petitioner, the application seeking refund is still pending and has not been disposed of. The refund pertains to the period June 2020 to November 2021, amounting to Rs. 2,74,37,701/-. 3. Since the application seeking refund is still pending, the petition is disposed of, directing the proper Officer to consider the applic...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
ORDER An order in original dated 23.12.2023 is assailed both on the ground of breach of principles of natural justice and on the ground that there are errors apparent on the face of record. 2. The petitioner is a company engaged in undertaking works contracts and turnkey projects, including Government projects, in Tamil Nadu, Puducherry and Mauritious. In Financial Year 2017-18, the total turnover of the petitioner was about Rs.200 crore. Proceedings were initiated against the petitio...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
ORDER An order dated 15.09.2023 is challenged on the ground that the petitioner did not have a reasonable opportunity to contest the tax demand on merits. 2. The petitioner is engaged in the business of wholesale and retail trading of plastic scraps and allied items. The petitioner asserts that the consultant engaged for GST compliances did not keep the petitioner informed about proceedings culminating in the order impugned herein. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner referred to...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
ORDER By these three writ petitions, orders confirming the tax proposal, imposing interest in respect thereof and the consequential recovery notice, respectively, are challenged. 2. The petitioner states that he was providing power aggregation services. Due to lack of business, he opted for cancellation of registration with effect from 31.03.2023. By asserting that the petitioner was unaware of the initiation of proceedings until the petitioner received the impugned recovery notice, t...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
ORDER An order dated 16.08.2023 and the consequential demand notice dated 17.08.2023 are challenged in this writ petition on the ground of breach of principles of natural justice. 2. The petitioner is engaged in the business of supplying granite, sandstone and related products. Upon examining the returns of the petitioner, notice in Form ASMT 10 was issued on 17.02.2023. This was followed by intimation dated 25.03.2023 and show cause notice dated 20.06.2023. The impugned order was iss...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in


29
Apr
S
M
T
W
T
F
S
30 Apr

☑ Quarterly | QRMP

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