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

DEEPAK PETROCHEM LIMITED vs. UNION OF INDIA


(Gujarat High Court | Feb 9, 2022)

1. We have heard Mr. Hasit Dave, the learned counsel appearing for the writ applicants. 2. The subject matter of challenge in the present writ application is to the order passed by the Principal Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise, Vadodara, II. The operative part of the order reads thus: “ORDER 1. I confirm the demand of Central Excise duty including Education Cess amounting to R4,12,31,903/- [Rs. Four Crore, Twelve Lakh. Thirty One Thousand Nine Hundred and Three only]...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

SWASTIK INTERNATIONAL vs. UNION OF INDIA


(Gujarat High Court | Feb 9, 2022)

1. By way of this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the writ applicant has prayed for the following reliefs: “A. Your Lordships may be pleased to admit this petition. B. Your Lordships may be pleased to allow this petition. C. Your Lordships may be pleased to issue writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing the respondent authorities to immediately sanction the refund of IGST aggregating to ₹ 37,01,326/- paid in regard to the g...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

AMNEAL PHARMACEUTICALS PVT. LTD.


(Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, Gujrat | Feb 9, 2022)

The appellant, M/s. Amneal Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. filed an application for advance ruling before the Gujarat Authority for Advance Ruling (herein after referred to as the ‘GAAR’), wherein it submitted that it enters into contract with the employees at the time of appointing any employee at their factory, by issuing ‘Appointment Letter’. One of the conditions mentioned in the ‘Appointment Letter’ is - “Your services can be terminated by giving ...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

AJAY VERMA vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS


(Allahabad High Court | Feb 9, 2022)

1. Heard Sri Shambhu Chopra, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Mahima Jaiswal and Sri Saurabh Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri B.P. Singh Kachhawah, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent nos. 3,4 and 6 and Sri Krishna Ji Shukla, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 1 and 5. FACTS 2. Briefly stated facts of the present case are that the petitioner claims to be engaged in the business of lubricants after obtaining registration under the Central Goods and Servi...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
Heard learned counsel for the parties. Writ petitioner has been preferred for the following reliefs: “(a) For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or directions, directing upon the Respondent No.3 to show cause as to how and under what authority of law, the amount of Input Tax Credit lying in the Electronic Credit Ledger of the petitioner has been blocked, without even there being any determination of any amount due as against this petitioner. (b) For issuance of an approp...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

RAFIK ALIBHAI MAKVANA vs. STATE OF GUJARAT


(Gujarat High Court | Feb 9, 2022)

1. Rule returnable forthwith. Mr. Utkarsh Sharma, the learned AGP waives service of Rule for and on behalf of the respondents. 2. By way of this writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the writ applicant has prayed for the following reliefs: “20. (a) To issue a Writ of Mandamus and/or Writ of Certiorari and/or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, quashing and setting aside an order dated 20/01/2021 passed by the respondent No.2 for Cancell...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The present challenge relates to the show cause notice dated 14.06.2021 (Annexure-1) issued under Section 73 of the Jharkhand Goods and Services Tax (JGST) Act, 2017 and the summary of the show cause notice in Form DRC-01 dated 14.06.2021 (Annexure-2) also issued by the respondent no.3 under Rule 142(1)(a) of the JGST Rules, 2017 since the previous show cause notice dated 07.06.2021 (Annexure- 3) issued under Section 73 of the JGST Act has been wi...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
This batch of writ petitions have been filed challenging the respective orders passed by the second respondent, under which, the refund application either has been rejected or partly rejected. 2. Since the facts are similar to each of case, for the sake of convenience, the facts relates to W.P.No.24731 of 2021 is traversed herein. 3. The petitioner's company was registered with GST Department and is allotted to the Central Government for administrative control. The petitioner clai...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
In this writ petition, petitioner has challenged the impugned adjudication order dated June 24, 2019 by contending that in view of amendment to section 50 subsection (1) of the GST Act, 2017 and the order of the appellate authority dated March 6, 2020 in connection with interest under section 50 sub-section (1) of the GST Act relating to the assessment year 2017-18, the aforesaid impugned order of adjudication relating to interest is not sustainable in law. Section 50 sub-section (1) of t...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
Heard Mr. G. Narendra Chetty, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Y. N. Vivekananda, learned Government Pleader, Commercial Tax, for the respondents. 2. The petitioner has moved the Court for the following relief: “........ to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly in the nature of MANDAMUS holding that the action of the First Respondent in stopping and detaining the goods of the Petitioner (8695 Kgs of MS Iron) along with Vehicle no. AP 02 T 344...
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)).