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

  13,135 Results

The petitioner is an assessee under the provisions of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (in short ‘CGST Act/Act’) and challenges proceedings dated 23.11.2020 issued by the first respondent attaching the petitioner’s bank accounts in terms of Section 83 of CGST Act, based upon proceedings for search and seizure launched as against the petitioner in terms of Section 67 of the Act. 2. Heard Mr.P.Rajkumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.V.Sundareswaran, ...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

MANOJ KUMAR vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHER


(Patna High Court | Oct 5, 2021)

Petitioner has prayed for the following relief:- (a) For issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing of the communication in form GST APL-04 dated 09.04.2021 issued by the respondent number 2 whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 09.02.2021 passed by the respondent No. 3 under section 74 of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the Bihar act 2017 for short) has been rejected and a summary revised demand has ...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
Prayer sought for herein is for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the respondent in Form GST DRC-02, dated 23/01/2020 and 05/02/2020 respectively, bearing Reference No. 210211180000472 and 210211180000471, respectively, and quash the same and further direct the respondent to accept the manually filed TRAN-1, dated 13/12/2019, and allow the transitional input tax credit availed therein. 2.When these cases came up for hearing on 24.09.2021, the following orders a...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
The petition has been heard by way of video conferencing. Present writ petition has been filed seeking quashing of the show cause notice dated 08th February, 2021 issued by Delhi GST/respondent No. 2 as well as for reverting/changing back the nature of levy to be imposed on the petitioner from regular to composition levy w.e.f. 01st January, 2020. Learned counsel for petitioner states that though the petitioner is not engaged in any interstate outward supply of goods, yet it has been ...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

TELANGANA STATE TECHNOLOGY SERVICES LIMITED (TSTSL..


(Authority for Advance Ruling, Telangana | Oct 4, 2021)

1. M/s. TELANGANA STATE TECHNOLOGY SERVICES LIMITED (TSTSL) Telangana State Public Sector Undertaking and TSTSL is a Service Agency to the Telangana Government and its Departments relating to Information Technology and its related services (hereafter ‘applicant’), (GSTIN No. 36AAFCT5611E1ZK) have filed an application in FORM GST ARA-01 under Section 97(1) of TGST Act, 2017 read with Rule 104 of CGST/TGST Rules, seeking Advance Ruling seeking clarification. 2. At the outset, it...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
Heard Mr. Sonpal, learned special counsel for the review petitioners and Mr. Anurag Soan, learned counsel for respondent No.1 (original petitioner). We have also heard Mr. Jitendra Mishra, learned counsel for respondent No.3. 2. This petition seeks review of judgment and order dated 16.09.2020 passed by the writ court in Writ Petition No.6968 of 2019. 3. Since there is delay of 50 days in filing the review petition, review applicants have filed interim application for condonation of d...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

VARUN BEVERAGES LIMITED vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS


(Allahabad High Court | Oct 4, 2021)

Heard Sri Shubham Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Apoorv Hajela, learned Standing Counsel for the revenue. Challenge has been raised to the order dated 03.11.2018 passed by the respondent no.2, Additional Commissioner Grade-II (Appeal)-I, Commercial Tax, Zone-I, Varanasi under Section 107(4) of U.P. GST Act, 2017 and also the order dated 21.02.2018 passed by respondent no.3, Assistant Commissioner Incharge (Mobile Squad-2), Chandauli. By the impugned order dated 21...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
1. The Petitioner, who is a dealer registered under the Odisha GST Act, has filed this petition questioning the order dated 5th April, 2021 passed by the Additional Commissioner of CT & GST (Appeal), Bhubaneswar rejecting the Petitioner’s appeal questioning the order passed by the learned Proper Officer (LPO) rejecting the Petitioner’s application for revocation of cancellation of his registration on 7th January, 2021 under Section 30(2) of the OGST Act. 2. The background ...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

VINAYAK BULIDCON


(Authority for Advance Ruling, Rajasthan | Oct 1, 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 COST Act / RGST Act would be mentioned as bei...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
1. Heard Ms. Anjali Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri R.C. Shukla, learned counsel for the revenue and Sri Namit Srivastava, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Manish Trivedi, learned counsel appearing for the respondent- Bank. 2. Present writ petition has been filed to assail the action taken by the respondents-revenue authorities whereby they had restrained the petitioner from utilising its money lying in its bank account bearing No. 414505000364 with the ICICI Bank Ltd., Advant ...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in


13
May
S
M
T
W
T
F
S
13 May

☑ Monthly | GSTR-5

GSTR-5 for the m/o Apr 2025 [Return by Non Resident Taxpayers - Rule 63 - Section 39(5)]

☑ Monthly | GSTR-6

GSTR-6 for the m/o Apr 2025 [For Input Service Distributors - Rule 65 & Section 39(4)].

☑ Monthly | IFF

IFF for the m/o Apr 2025 (QRMP Taxpayers, Optional) - Rule 59(2).

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)).