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

  13,315 Results

SAFFRON ART PRIVATE LIMITED


(Authority for Advance Ruling, Maharashtra | May 20, 2022)

(Under section 98 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017) GST-ARA-51/2020-21/B-62, Mumbai, dt. 20.05.2022 The present application has been filed under section 97 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 [hereinafter referred to as “the CGST Act and MGST Act” respectively] by M/s. Saffron Art Private Limited the applicant, seeking an advanc...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

GURKRIPA CAREER EDUCATION PRIVATE LIMITED


(Authority for Advance Ruling, Rajasthan | May 19, 2022)

At the outset, we would like to make it clear that the provisions of both the CGST Act and the RGST Act are the same except for certain provisions. Therefore, unless a mention is specifically made to such dissimilar provisions, a reference to the CGST Act would also mean a reference to the same provision under the RGST Act. Further to the earlier, henceforth for the purposes of this Advance Ruling, a reference to such a similar provision under the CGST Act / RGST Act would be mentioned as bei...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

CROWN CRAFT INDIA PRIVATE LTD


(Authority for Advance Ruling, Rajasthan | May 19, 2022)

Note: Under Section 100 of the CGST/RGST Act, 2017, an appeal against this ruling lies before the Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling constituted under section 99 of CGST/RGST Act, 2017, within a period of 30 days from the date of service of this order. At the outset, we would like to make it clear that the provisions of both the CGST Act and the RGST Act are the same except for certain provisions. Therefore, unless a mention is specifically made to such dissimilar provisions, a refere...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

MODY EDUCATION FOUNDATION


(Authority for Advance Ruling, Rajasthan | May 19, 2022)

Note: Under Section 100 of the CGST/RGST Act, 2017, an appeal against this ruling lies before the Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling constituted under section 99 of CGST/RGST Act, 2017, within a period of 30 days from the date of communication of this order. At the outset, we would like to make it clear that the provisions of both the CGST Act and the RGST Act are the same except for certain provisions. Therefore, unless a mention is specifically made to such dissimilar provisions, a ...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

REAL METALS TRADING vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS


(Allahabad High Court | May 19, 2022)

Sri Nishant Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent no.1 and Sri Gaurav Mahajan alongwith Sri Dhananjay Awasthi, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondent nos. 2 and 3. This writ petition has been filed praying for the following relief:- A- Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing respondent nos. 2 and 3 to return/refund the amount of Rs. 25,00,000/- along with interest, which was illegally collected ...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

JUHI ALLOYS LIMITED vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS


(Allahabad High Court | May 19, 2022)

Heard Sri V.K. Upadhya, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Ritvik Upadhya, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri B.P. Singh Kachhawah, learned standing counsel for the State-respondents. This writ petition has been filed praying for the following relief: "i) issue a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari calling for the record of the case and to quash the impugned order dated 29.03.2022 passed by the respondent no. 2 for the F.Y. 2017-2018 Tax Pe...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

VEDANT CONSTRUCTION vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS


(Allahabad High Court | May 19, 2022)

Heard the counsel for the petitioner. The present petition has been filed challenging the order dated 23.12.2021 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Grade II (Appeal), Commercial Tax Department, Jhansi, i.e., respondent no. 2 whereby the appeal of the petitioner filed against the order dated 26.11.2018 regarding cancellation of its registration has been dismissed. The appeal has been dismissed on grounds of limitation. It has been recorded in the impugned order that the limitation ...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
The Revenue questions the propriety of an order passed by the Commissioner of Appeals to the extent that the appellate authority has declined the Revenue’s demand pertaining to a sum of Rs. 2,18,75,232/- for which undue credit, according to the Revenue, was obtained by the respondent assessee. 2. The matter pertains to the period of transition in 2017 to the goods and services tax regime. The substance of the dispute relates to the payment by the assessee of the service tax componen...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
A Introduction 1 The Union of India “Union Government” or “Central Government” is in appeal against a judgment of a Division Bench of the Gujarat High Court dated 23 January 2020. The High Court allowed a petition instituted by the respondents under Article 226 for challenging the constitutionality of two notifications of the Central Government. The bone of contention is whether an Indian importer can be subject to the levy of Integrated Goods and Service...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

HEMANT TYAGI vs. UNION OF INDIA


(Supreme Court | May 18, 2022)

ORDER 1. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that it is not in dispute that accused-Praveen Jangir (A-4) has been granted bail by the High Court on 04.10.2021, within two months of his judicial custody. He submits that the petitioner has remained in judicial custody since 10.07.2021. 2. Learned Additional Solicitor General appearing on behalf of the respondent vehemently opposes the bail application. 3. Taking into consideration the fact that the petition...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in


  Hide
24
May
S
M
T
W
T
F
S
25 May

☑ Monthly | PMT-06

PMT-06 Monthly tax payment for Apr 2025 under QRMP Scheme [Rule 61(1)(ii) - Proviso to Section 39(7)].

Taxpayers have a choice to pay tax either, as per -  

A) Fixed Sum Method OR 
B) Self assessment basis subject to interest on short payment of taxes.
(Notification No.85/2020 - CT)
 
28 May

☑ Monthly | GSTR-11

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