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

ADITHYA AUTOMOTIVE APPLICATIONS PVT. LTD.


(Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, Uttar Pradesh | Nov 25, 2021)

The present appeal has been filed under Section 100 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 and Uttar Pradesh Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as “the CGST Act and UPGST Act”) by M/s. Adithya Automotive Applications Pvt Ltd, Vendors Industrial Park, Plot No. T-2, Tata Motors Eastern Complex, Chinhat Industiral Area, Goyala Deva Road, Lucknow (hereinafter referred to as the “Appellant”) against the Advance Ruling Order No. UP ADRG 82/...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

MANUPATRA INFORMATION SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED


(Authority for Advance Ruling, Uttar Pradesh | Nov 25, 2021)

1. M/s Manupatra Information Solutions Private Limited, B-37, Sector-1, Noida, Gautam Budh Nagar-201301 (here in after referred to as the applicant) is a registered assessee under GST having GSTN 09AACCM5884H1Z2. 2. The applicant has filed application for advance ruling in Form ARA-01 and submitted as under- (1) they are engaged in providing on-line text based information such as online books, newspapers, periodicals, directories etc (judgements/Notifications/Bare Acts/Rules/E-books/N...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
1. The petitioner in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, approaching this Court being aggrieved by an order in Appeal passed by the respondent No.3 and in absence of GST Appellate Tribunal as per the provisions of Section 109 and 110 of the Gujarat Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, Second Appeal is not feasible to be filed. Refund sanction order passed by the respondent No.2 as aggrieved the petitioner on account of non-payment of the interest thereon. The prayers sou...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

B.S. MINERALS vs. STATE OF ODISHA AND OTHERS


(Orissa High Court | Nov 25, 2021)

01. 1. This is the second writ petition by the same Petitioner i.e. M/s B.S. Minerals on the issue of denial of refund of unutilized input tax credit (ITC) against export of iron ore fines for which the export duty is nil as a result of an exemption notification. 2. In earlier writ petition of the Petitioner i.e. W.P.(C) No.26685 of 2021, the challenge was to two instructions dated 8th June and 25th June 2021 issued by the Joint Commissioner of CT and GST (Law) at Cuttack instructing Circ...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

RRIBADA FILMS PRIVATE LIMITED


(Authority for Advance Ruling, Maharashtra | Nov 24, 2021)

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. RRIBADA FILMS PRIVATE LIMITED, the applicant, seeking an advance ruling in respect of the following questions. Whether Liable to Pay GST under Normal or under Reverse Charge Mechanism on Import of Services which are not rendered in Indi...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
It is the case of the petitioner that after introduction of GST, a sum of ₹ 5,34,633/- was lying as un-utilized input tax credit in their VAT Account. According to the petitioner, the respondents called upon the petitioner to furnish documents to substantiate the aforesaid transitional credit for a sum of ₹ 5,34,633/-. However, the petitioner was able to furnish invoice only for a sum of ₹ 4,97,585/-. 2. It is the further case of the petitioner that a notice dated 20.11.2020 was add...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
1. The petitioners herein seeks the invocation of the writ jurisdiction for quashing the show cause notices dated 04.03.2020 and 11.03.2020 on the ground that they have been issued without assignment of any reasons for proposing the rejection of the claim of the petitioners of refund. The petitioners also challenged the orders dated 23.03.2020 passed without availing any opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioners and passed without assigning any reasons. 2. The prayers sought for ...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

ARSH TRADERS vs. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER


(Gujarat High Court | Nov 24, 2021)

1. The petitioner is proprietary firm trading in all types of scraps is granted TIN No.2422601774 on 13.06.2013 under the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as “VAT Act”). The petitioner has been registered under the Central Goods and Service Tax Act with Registration w.e.f. 01.07.2017 and the certificate of the said registration dated 07.07.2018. 2. A show cause notice came to be issued for cancellation of Registration on 24.06.2019 on the ground that ...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

OJESH PATI vs. STATE OF ODISHA AND OTHERS


(Orissa High Court | Nov 24, 2021)

1. There are five prayers in the present petition, which read as under: "i. why the action and decision of the Opp.parties shall not be declared illegal, unconstitutional and violative of legal right of the petitioner on account of the Taxes being shared and borne by the petitioner on post enactment goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, thereby infringing the Goods and Service Tax, 2017. ii. the Opp. parties shall not be directed to restitute the benefit of GST to the petitioner along...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

BIPLAB KUMAR CHOWDHURY vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS


(Calcutta High Court | Nov 24, 2021)

This appeal filed by the writ petitioner is directed against the order dated 03.08.2021 passed in WPA 11623/2021. The said writ petition was filed by the appellant praying for issuance of writ of mandamus to direct the respondent nos. 2 and 3 to consider and dispose of the representation given by the appellant dated 23.03.2021 and 13.04.2021; to issue a direction to the authorities to take prompt steps to release the monetary compensation/reward which the appellant is entitled to as he was th...
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)).