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

  13,223 Results

1. By this writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the writ applicant has prayed for the following reliefs: “(A) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to issue writ in nature of mandamus and / or other appropriate writ quashing and setting aside the impugned show cause notice dated 14.12.2021 and the impugned order of cancellation of registration dated 30.12.2021 passed by the respondent No.2; (B) DURING THE PENDENCY AND UNTIL THE FINAL DISPOSAL OF THIS PETITION...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
1. Since the issues raised in all the captioned writ applications are the same, those were taken up for hearing analogously and are being disposed of by this common judgment and order. 2. For the sake of convenience, the Special Civil Application No.18860 of 2021 is treated as the lead matter. 3. By this writ-application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the writ applicants have prayed for the following reliefs: “a. Direct Respondent no.3 to revoke cancellation...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
The petitioner has filed this writ petition for a Mandamus to direct the respondents to consider the petitioner's rectified manual TRAN-1 filed along with the representation dated 18.06.2020 for crediting the ITC on stock of goods for ₹ 11,83,309/- into the Electronic cash/Credit ledger of the petitioner. 2.It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is a manufacturer of Grey Woven Fabric. It is submitted that the petitioner purchased Cotton Grey Yarn from various parties i...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

SURAT MUNICIPAL CORPORATION


(Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, Gujrat | Feb 24, 2022)

At the outset we would like to make it clear that the provisions of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and Gujarat Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘CGST Act, 2017’ and the ‘GGST 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, 2017 ...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

ARBUDA TRANSPORT


(Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, Gujrat | Feb 24, 2022)

1. At the outset we would like to make it clear that the provisions of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and Gujarat Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘CGST Act, 2017’ and the ‘GGST 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 CG...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

J.K INFRATECH vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER AND OTHERS


(Allahabad High Court | Feb 24, 2022)

1. Heard Shri Aditya Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Jagdish Mishra, learned Standing Counsel. 2. Challenge has been raised to the order dated 16.07.2021 passed by the Additional Commissioner Grade II (Appeal), Commercial Tax, Sonbhadra, whereby the said authority has dismissed the appeal no. GST-09/2021 filed by the petitioner against the order dated 17.9.2019 passed by Assistant Commissioner, Sector-3, Commercial Tax, Sonbhadra, cancelling the petitioner's regist...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
Heard Mr. Avinash Desai, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Y. N. Vivekananda, learned Government Pleader, Commercial Tax, for the respondents no.1 and 3 and Mr. Suresh Kumar Routhu, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondent no.2. 2. The matter is repeatedly being adjourned on the prayer made by the respondents seeking time for filing counter affidavit. 3. The petitioner has moved the Court for the following relief: “i) Declaring the actions of the respondents ...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
1. By this writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the writ applicant has prayed for the following reliefs: “A. To admit and allow this special civil application. B. To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ that this Hon’ble Court may deem fit directing the respondent authorities to conclude the investigation / inquiry under the complaint dated 31.08.2020 which is at Annexure A preferred by the present petitioner in a time bound ma...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

RAJENDRA NARAYAN MOHANTY vs. CT & GST AND OTHERS


(Orissa High Court | Feb 24, 2022)

1. This matter is taken up by virtual/physical mode. 2. The Petitioner questions the Show Cause Notice dated 25.01.2022 issued by the Opposite Party No. 1 (CT and GST Officer, Cuttack-I East Circle, Cuttack) vide Annexure-2 series U/s 74 of the CGST/OGST Act on the ground that the Proper Officer has no jurisdiction to invoke said provision. By referring to instructions appended to GSTR-9 (Annual Return) as substituted by virtue of the Central Goods and Services Tax (14th Amendment) Rules,...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

MS TRADERS vs. STATE OF GUJARAT


(Gujarat High Court | Feb 24, 2022)

1 We have heard Mr. Hardik Modh, the learned counsel appearing for the writ applicant and Mr. Utkarsh Sharma, the learned A.G.P. appearing for the respondents. 2 The writ applicant seeks to challenge the legality and validity of the impugned order passed by the State Tax Officer (II), Surat, dated 20th November 2021 in Form GST MOV – 11. 3 We are not inclined to entertain this writ application only on the ground that the impugned order passed by the authority concerned in Form G...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in


19
May
S
M
T
W
T
F
S
20 May

☑ Monthly | GSTR-3B

GSTR-3B for the m/o Apr 2025 (Monthly Taxpayer - Rule 61) - Either Compulsory taxpayer > 5 cr. or Voluntary taxpayer < 5 cr.

☑ Monthly | GSTR-5A

GSTR-5A for the m/o Apr 2025 [Return by OIDAR Service Providers - Rule 64.]

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)).