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

  13,194 Results

HARDIK TEXTILES vs. STATE OF GUJARAT


(Gujarat High Court | Dec 22, 2021)

1. The petitioner, in the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is seeking to approach this Court being aggrieved by the fact that the eligible refund amount which was credited in the wrong account due to inadvertent mistake of the petitioner’s consultant should not penalize the petitioner. 2. The prayers sought for are as follow: - “(a) Issue appropriate writ/order/direction for respondents to take appropriate action in this regard and disburse ...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

KRUSHANSINH PRATAPSINH ZALA vs. STATE OF GUJARAT


(Gujarat High Court | Dec 22, 2021)

1. By way of this application filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of Cr.P.C., the applicants prays for appropriate direction to the respondent namely Directorate General of Goods & Service Tax Intelligence, Ahmedabad Zonal Unit and Senior Intelligence Officer, Directorate General of Goods & Service Tax Intelligence-RU, Zonal Unit, DGGI-GRU, Gandhidham to allow the presence of applicant’s advocate at a visible but not audible distance during...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

CUMMINS INDIA LIMITED


(Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, Maharashtra | Dec 21, 2021)

At the outset, we would like to make it clear that the provisions of both the CGST Act and the MGST 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 provisions under the MGST Act. The present appeal has been filed under Section 100 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. and the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 [hereinafter...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Junior Panel Counsel for the respondent. I have perused the records and the decisions cited by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Junior Panel Counsel for the respondent. I have also perused the circular dated 29.12.2017 which was furnished today by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. The facts are not in dispute. It is the case of the petitioner that the Transferor Company namely the Quest Global Engi...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner has filed TRAN–1 under Section 140 of CGST/TNGST Act, during August 2017 and that there was certain errors and therefore, the petitioner filed revised TRAN–1 during November 2017. However, till date the respondents have not allowed the corrections as a result of which the petitioner was unable to utilize the accumulated Input Tax Credit under the provisions of the TNVAT Act, 2006 which was available as TRAN-1 credit for being ut...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

KAMAL RAY vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND


(Jharkhand High Court | Dec 21, 2021)

Heard Mr. B. M. Tripathi, learned senior counsel for the petitioner, Mr. P.A.S. Pati, learned G. A. - II as well as Mr. Ravi Prakash, learned Spl.P.P. for the State. The petitioner is an accused in connection with Chaibasa Sadar P.S. Case No. 21 of 2019. It has been alleged that the premises of M/s. Balaji Enterprises was inspected by the informant but it was not found and in the registration certificate the permanent address was written as House No. AJ-02, Ward No. - 15 Asama Cit...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
Heard learned Advocates appearing for the parties. In this writ petition, petitioners have challenged the impugned order of adjudication dated 1st November, 2021 passed by the GST Authority concerned as appears at page 47 to the writ petition. Main ground of challenge of the impugned adjudication order by the petitioners is that though the impugned adjudication order is appealable but the same is without jurisdiction and there is violation of principle of natural justice by not affording them...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

ROHAN TANNA vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS


(Chhattisgarh High Court | Dec 21, 2021)

As above two applications for grant of regular bail arise out of same crime number, they were heard together and disposed of by this common order. 2. Applicants in above applications are in custody since 20.7.2021 in connection with Crime No.133/2020-21 registered in the office of Senior Intelligence Officer, Director General of GST Intelligence Zonal Unit, Raipur, District Raipur (CG) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 16 & 132 (1) (b) & (c) of the Central Goods ...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
This is an application for review of the order of this Court (Coram : Hon'ble Mr.Justice T.S.Sivagnanam and Hon'ble Mr.Justice Sathi Kumar Sukumara Kurup) dated 05.08.2021 recorded on W.A. No.1881 of 2021. 2. Mr.Arvind P. Datar, learned senior advocate for applicant / appellant / writ petitioner has submitted that the binding precedent, including the law having force of Article 141 of the Constitution of India which was put to notice at the relevant time was not considered and tha...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
C.M.No.46150/2021 Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.   Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. W.P.(C) No.14647/2021 1. Present writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 31st March, 2021, whereby the respondent has directed the Bankers of the petitioner to provisionally attach the petitioner’s personal bank accounts and immovable properties. Petitioner also seeks directions to the respondent to de-freeze the personal bank...
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)).