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

  12,949 Results

YASH BUILDING MATERIAL vs. STATE OF UP AND OTHERS


(Allahabad High Court | Apr 23, 2024)

ORDER HON'BLE SHEKHAR B. SARAF,J. 1. Heard Sri Pranjal Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State. 2. This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, wherein the petitioner has challenged the order dated July 7, 2021 passed by respondent No.3/Assistant Commissioner, Sector- 6, Muzaffarnagar and the order passed in appeal dated August 31, 2022 by respondent No.2/Additional Commissioner, Grad...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

LD GOYAL STEELS PVT LTD vs. STATE OF UP AND OTHERS


(Allahabad High Court | Apr 23, 2024)

ORDER HON'BLE SHEKHAR B. SARAF,J. 1. Heard Sri Shubham Agrawal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Sri Ravi Shankar Pandey, learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State. 2. This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, wherein the petitioner is aggrieved by the order imposing penalty dated October 28, 2022 and the order in Appeal dated March 5, 2024. 3. Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the e-in...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
ORDER HON'BLE SHEKHAR B. SARAF, J. 1. Heard Sri Suyash Agarwal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner and Sri Rishi Kumar Pandey, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents. 2. This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India wherein the writ petitioner is aggrieved by an ex party order passed by the appellate authority dated December 7, 2023. 3. The grounds of challenge are that the quantification of liability...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

MRM CONSTRUCTION vs. STATE TAX OFFICER & OTHERS


(Madras High Court | Apr 22, 2024)

COMMON ORDER In these three writ petitions, separate orders dated 07.06.2023 are challenged on the ground that the petitioner did not have reasonable opportunity to contest the tax demand. The petitioner states that he is a civil works contractor undertaking constructions work. It is further asserted that the petitioner was allotted to the Central GST authorities, but that proceedings were initiated by the State GST authorities. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the b...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
ORDER This matter is taken up by hybrid mode. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. S. Mishra, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the CT & GST Department; Mr. P.K. Parhi, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India appearing for Opposite Party No.7 and Mr. A. Agrawal, learned counsel appearing for the Opposite Party No.6. 3. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking to quash the circular no.34/8/2018-GST dated 01.03.2018 under Annexure-7 as well as the n...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL) 1. Petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent to allow the application of the petitioner seeking cancellation of its GST registration. 2. Issue notice. Notice is accepted by learned counsel for respondent. 3. With the consent of parties, petition is taken up for final disposal. 4. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner has closed his business and has applied for cancellation of registration on 22.01.2024, however, th...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL) 1. Petitioner impugns order dated 25.12.2023 passed under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 [“the Act”], whereby a show cause notice dated 21.09.2023 issued by the Sales Tax Officer, Class-II has been adjudicated and a demand of Rs. 15,53,240/- created against the petitioner. 2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner was not aware of the said show cause notice and as such, could not file resp...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
COMMON ORDER By these two writ petitions, show cause notices relating to the cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration and tax proposals for the tax period 2018-19 are challenged. 2. On perusal of the impugned show cause notices, it is evident that such show cause notice pertains to alleged contravention of specific provisions of applicable GST statutes. Since the challenge is to show cause notices, I am not inclined to exercise discretionary jurisdiction except to the lim...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
ORDER An order dated 27.11.2023 is challenged primarily on the ground of breach of principles of natural justice. The petitioner asserts that he was unaware of the show cause notice dated 22.06.2023 and the impugned order because the same was not communicated through any other mode other than being uploaded on the portal. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner referred to show cause notice dated 22.06.2023 and submitted that the impugned order was issued within six months from the date...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
ORDER Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent Nos. 1 & 2-State. 2. The petitioner has questioned the constitutional validity of Section 16 (4) of CGST/SGST Act, 2017 read with Rule 61 (5) of Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, being illegal, unreasonable, arbitrary and discriminatory. In addition, the petitioner also sought writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned show cause notice as violative of Ar...
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)