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

  13,170 Results

1. Present writ petition has been filed with the following prayers: “i. To issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction, to direct the Respondents to open the common portal for the Petitioner to be able to file TRAN-1 electronically; or alternatively to allow the Petitioner to avail the said ITC by manually filing TRAN-1 or by furnishing the details in Form GSTR 3B or in any other manner so as to enable the Petitioner to avail th...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith at the request and with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. 3. By these petitions, the petitioners seek the following substantive reliefs in both the petitions: (a) issue a writ of certiorari or a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside the impugned order passed by the Respondent No.1 dated 01.10.2021; (b) is...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

RICHWELL ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED


(Authority for Advance Ruling, Rajasthan | Nov 26, 2021)

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

ALCOATS


(Authority for Advance Ruling, Karnataka | Nov 26, 2021)

M/s. ALCOATS (herein after referred to as “Applicant”}, Plot No.242, Hebbal Industrial Area, Mysuru - 570 018, having GSTIN 29AAHFA7052R1ZS, have filed an application for rectification of mistake (ROM) under Section 102 of CGST Act, 2017 and Section 102 of KGST Act, 2017 against the ruling passed by this authority vide Order No. KAR ADRG 62/2021 dated 29/10/2021. 2. The applicant filed the instant application to bring to the notice of this authority, for rectification of ...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

XTRACARE PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED


(Authority for Advance Ruling, Karnataka | Nov 26, 2021)

M/s. Xtracare Products Private Limited (herein after referred to as “the applicant”), No.725, 6th B Cross, 3rd Block, Koramangala, Bengaluru-560 034 having GSTIN29AAACX0193J1Z2 have filed an application for Advance Ruling under Section 97 of CGST Act, 2017 read with Rule 104 of CGST Rules, 2017 and Section 97 of KGST Act, 2017 read with Rule 104 of KGST Rules, 2017, in form GST ARA-01 discharging the fee of ₹ 5,000/- each under the CGST Act and the KGST Act. 2. The Applicant...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

SMRUTI RANJAN SAHOO vs. STATE OF ODISHA


(Orissa High Court | Nov 26, 2021)

1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode). 2. This is the 2nd journey of the Petitioner who is in custody in connection with No. P.R.02 of 2020-21 dated 17.12.2020 of the CT & GST Enforcement Unit, Bhubaneswar corresponding to 2(C) CC Case No. 317 of 2021 on the file of learned J.M.F.C., Bhubaneswar running for commission of offences punishable under section 132 (1)(b)(c) and (1) of Odisha Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short called as &lsquo...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
The petitioner has challenged the impugned show cause notices issued under Section 129(3) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 on the ground that there is predetermination and therefore, the show cause notices issued by the respondent are liable to be quashed. 2.In this connection, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court made in the case of ORYX Fisheries Private Limited v. Union of Indi...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
1. The petitioner has approached this Court by way of the instant application under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “Code”) seeking anticipatory bail in a matter pertaining to Section 132 of the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017 (hereafter referred to as the “CGST Act”) in File Number DZU/INV/A/GST/894/2021. Another Application bearing CRL. M.A. - 16552/2021 has also been filed before this Court under Section 438 read wit...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

GURDIT DANG vs. STATE OF ODISHA


(Orissa High Court | Nov 26, 2021)

1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode). 2. This is the 2nd journey of the Petitioner who is in custody in connection with No. P.R.02 of 2021-22 dated 09.07.2021 of the CT & GST Enforcement Unit, Rourkela, corresponding to 2(C) CC Case No. 32 of 2021 on the file of learned S.D.J.M., Panposh, Rourkela running for commission of offences punishable under section 132 (1)(b)(c) and (1) of Odisha Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short called as ...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
Heard Shri Shubham Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Jagdish Mishra, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that good were being transported in a truck to Hazrat Nizamuddin Junction in Delhi for their onwards transportation by rail to Nipani in Kartanaka State. However, the vehicle was intercepted and seizure order was passed. The contention is that invoice and bilty were produced by the driver, however,...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in


16
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)).