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

This case is taken up for final hearing today. 2. The issue appears to be squarely covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in the case of Commissioner of GST and Central Excise, Chennai South Commissionerate and others Vs. M/s.Bharat Electronics Limited, Rep by its General Manager, Nandambakkam, Chennai. The Hon'ble Division Bench of this court has confirmed the views with the following observations:- ''12.Thus, there seems to...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
All the writ petitions are tagged together as common issues relating to levy of goods and service tax under Reverse Charge Mechanism on the amount of Royalty and District Mineral Fund Contribution paid by them to the State of Jharkhand in respect of minor mineral lease are involved in all the writ petitions. In WPT No. 4609/2021, petitioner is seeking declaration that no GST is leviable on the amount of Royalty and District Mineral Fund Contribution paid by him to the State of Jharkhand. ...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

SHRI SURYA TRADERS vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS


(Allahabad High Court | Jan 6, 2022)

1. Heard Sri Aditya Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Jagdish Prasad Mishra, learned Standing Counsel for the State. 2. With the consent of the parties, the present writ petition is being decided finally without calling for the affidavits. 3. The present petition has been filed assailing the order dated 8.4.2021 passed by the respondent no. 3 by which the appeal of the petitioner has been rejected and the order dated 16.10.2019 under Section 129 (3) of UPGST Act, 2017 ...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

KARNATAKA TRADERS vs. STATE OF GUJARAT


(Gujarat High Court | Jan 6, 2022)

1. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned A.G.P. Mr. Utkarsh Sharma waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondents. 2. The challenge in the present writ application is to the confiscation notice dated 4th December 2021 issued by the Tax Commissioner (Enforcement) Division – 1, Ahmedabad, in exercise of powers conferred under Section 130 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short, “the CGST Act”) read with the relevant provisions of the ...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
By this common order, both these writ petitions are being disposed of. 2.The petitioner has challenged the impugned communication of the respondents dated 18.12.2017 and 20.12.2017 in the respective writ petitions. Both the impugned communications are almost identical which reads as under:- ''In W.P.No.10541 of 2019, impugned communication dated 18.12.2017:- Take notice that M/s.Pragal Associates is a registered dealer under VAT and GST vide TIN 334170024183 and GSTIN 34AB...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

VARDHMAN EXIM vs. SHUBHAGATA KUMAR AND OTHERS


(Delhi High Court | Jan 5, 2022)

The hearing was conducted through video conferencing. 1. The Division Bench of this court, vide order dated 23.12.2021 in W.P.(C) NO. 14848/2021, had directed the petitioner’s bank account to be de-frozen. 2. It is not in dispute that the account could have been frozen at best for one year under s.83(1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (‘the Act’). The bank account of the petitioner was frozen on 14.07.2020, its validity expired on 13.07.2021. Despite ...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

DLECTA FOODS PVT. LTD


(Authority for Advance Ruling, Maharashtra | Jan 4, 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. Dlecta Foods Pvt Ltd., the applicant, seeking an advance ruling in respect of the following question. Whether the product 'Non-Dairy Cream' manufactured by the Applicant is covered under CH 1517 90 90 or under CH 2106 90 99 of the GST Tar...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

EMCURE PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED


(Authority for Advance Ruling, Maharashtra | Jan 4, 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. Emcure Pharmaceuticals Limited., the applicant, seeking an advance ruling in respect of the following questions. (a) Whether the GST would be payable on recoveries made from the employees towards providing canteen facility at subsidized...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
The petitioner is challenging Ext.P3 order issued under Section 129 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 to the extent it invoked the bank guarantee furnished by the petitioner, while obtaining release of the goods detained under Section 129(1) of the said Act. 2. The limited relief claimed by the petitioner is that the statute permits him to prefer an appeal within a period of three months and if within the said period of three months, he abides by the terms stipulated in Secti...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

C.A. SHAJI vs. STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS


(Kerala High Court | Jan 4, 2022)

Petitioner is aggrieved by the alleged delay on the part of the respondents in sanctioning the amount of GST receivable by the petitioner. 2. Petitioner had satisfactorily completed the work awarded to him pursuant to Ext.P2. According to the petitioner, by virtue of circulars dated 14.12.2017 and 01.03.2019 and the order dated 22.12.2019, Government had decided that the entire GST or a portion of it, as the case may be, paid by the respective contractors be refunded back to the Contracto...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in


17
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)).