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

  13,334 Results

PURABDHANI ENTERPRISE vs. STATE OF GUJARAT


(Gujarat High Court | Jul 7, 2022)

ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA) In the facts and circumstances of the case and having regard to the nature of the issue involved, the petition was taken up for final consideration today. 1.1 Rule, returnable forthwith. Learned advocate Mr. Utkarsh Sharma waives service of Rule on behalf of respondent No.2. 1.2 Heard learned advocate Mr. Chetan Pandya for the petitioner and learned advocate for the respondent. 2. The petitioner M/s. Purabdhani Enterpri....
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
Heard learned advocate Mr. Kishore Kunal with learned advocate Mr. Parth Contractor for the petitioner and learned advocate Mr. Nikunt Raval for the respondent No.3. 2. The petitioner-private limited company engaged in the business of processing of edible oils and coffee etc. has by filling the present Special Civil Application prayed to direct the respondents to refund the Integrated Goods and Services Tax (hereinafter referred to as “IGST”) calculated on the amount of ocean ....
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

JSW STEEL LIMITED vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS


(Orissa High Court | Jul 7, 2022)

I.A. No.8421 of 2022 1. This matter is taken up by virtual/physical mode and heard counsel for respective parties. 2. I.A. No.8421 of 2022 has been filed on 23.06.2022 by the petitioner for advancing the date of posting from 12th August, 2022, as directed vide Order dated 17th May, 2022, to any earlier date. 3. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that after passing of Order dated 17th May, 2022 in the aforenoted writ petition, the petitioner-company has taken a decis....
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Writ petition was preferred for the following reliefs: A. For issuance of an appropriate writ(s), order(s) or directions holding that the service of a Show Cause Notice under sub- Section (1) of Section 73 of the Jharkhand Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 is a condition precedent for issuance of any Order under Section 73(9) ibid or any other provisions of the Act. B. For issuance of writ(s) of quo warranto and/or any appropriate writ, ord....
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

SEVOKE MOTORS vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS


(Calcutta High Court | Jul 7, 2022)

The writ petitioner has prayed for issuance of a writ of mandamus to command the authorities to allow revision and/or correction of Form GST TRAN-1 either on the portal or manually for the purpose of claiming transitional credit under Section 140 read with Rule 117 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short “CGST Act”). The petitioner claims to be an authorized Maruti Dealer and is duly registered with the CGST authorities as well as SGST authorities. The petit....
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
1. By filing this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs: “i. Issue a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari, calling the record of the case and quash the summoning order issued to the petitioners. (Annexure No. 5 to W.P.) ii. Issue a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondent not arrest the petitioners in pre inquiry proceeding in pursuance of the summon dated 03.11.2021 issued to pe....
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

TEAMLEASE EDUCATION FOUNDATION


(Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, Karnataka | Jul 6, 2022)

1. At the outset we would like to make it clear that the provisions of CGST, Act 2017 and SGST, Act 2017 are in pari materia and have the same provisions in like matter and differ from each other only on a few specific provisions. Therefore, unless a mention is particularly made to such dissimilar provisions, a reference to the CGST Act would also mean reference to the corresponding similar provisions in the KGST Act. 2. The present appeal has been filed under section 100 of the Central G....
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

BHARATIYA RESERVE BANK NOTE MUDRAN PVT LTD


(Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, Karnataka | Jul 6, 2022)

1. At the outset we would like to make it clear that the provisions of CGST, Act 2017 and SGST, Act 2017 arc in pari materia and have the same provisions in like matter and differ from each other only on a few specific provisions. Therefore, unless a mention is particularly made to such dissimilar provisions, a reference to the CGST Act would also mean reference to the corresponding similar provisions in the KGST Act. 2. The present appeal has been filed under section 100 of the....
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
ORDER 1. The present Report dated 26.11.2020 had been furnished by the Director General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP), under Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods & Services Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017. The brief facts of the case are that a reference was received from the Standing Committee on Anti-profiteering on 09.10.2019 to conduct a detailed investigation in respect of an application filed by the Applicant No. 1 under Rule 128 of the CGST Rules. 2017, alleging profiteering by the Responden....
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

DIRECTOR GENERAL OF ANTI-PROFITEERING, CENTRAL BOA.. vs. NY CINEMA UP


(National Anti Profiteering Authority | Jul 6, 2022)

1.  The Present Report dated 31.03.2021 had been furnished by the Director General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP), under Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods & Services Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017 in compliance of the Order No. 15/2020 dated 12.03.2020, wherein this Authority had directed the DGAP under Rule 133(5) of the CGST Rules, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as “the Rules”) to conduct investigation of all the screens being operated by the Respondent which had not been investiga....
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in


  Hide
28
May
S
M
T
W
T
F
S
28 May

☑ Monthly | GSTR-11

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