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

  13,131 Results

SANKALP FACILITIES AND MANAGEMENT SERVICES PVT. LT..


(Authority for Advance Ruling, Gujrat | Sep 6, 2021)

BRIEF FACTS: The applicant M/s. Sankalp Facilities and Management Services Pvt. Ltd., is engaged in the business of providing man power supply for housekeeping, cleaning, security, data entry operator etc. 2. The applicant submits its service recipients, as offices of the following: 1. Collector Kacheri, Chhota Udaipur. 2. Mamlatdar Kacheri, Bodeli. 3. Police Adhikshak Shree Kacheri-Chota Udaipur. 4. Mamlatdar Kacheri-Sankheda. 5. Nayab Collector Kacheri-Bodeli. ...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
The prayer sought in this Writ Petition is for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records on the file of the respondent in GSTIN 33ALDPB3684K1Z6 dated 18.11.2020 and to quash the same as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of the principles of natural justice, without jurisdiction and clear violation of Section 140(1) of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Act, 2017 and direct the respondent to pass assessment order afresh by considering the reply dated 14.10.2020 after affordin...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
This writ petition sought for quashing Exts.P8 and P9. Exts. P8 and P9 are orders of detention under Section 129(1) of Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017 as well as notice under Section 129(3) of the CGST act. It is submitted that pursuant to Ext.P8, the petitioner had furnished bank guarantee and had obtained release of goods, but the adjudication proceedings consequent to the said orders had not been completed. It is also pointed out that due to the pendency of the writ petit...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
Captioned writ petition turns on a very short point notwithstanding very many averments and grounds raised in the writ affidavit and this is owing to what unfurled in the virtual hearing today. Therefore, with the consent of both sides i.e., Mr.N. Murali, learned counsel for writ petitioner and Ms. Amirta Dinakaran, learned State counsel, who accepted notice on behalf of both the respondents, the main writ petition is taken up. 2. An 'order dated 18.10.2019 bearing reference No.007/20...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

JAYSHREE FOOD PRODUCTS vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER AND OTHERS


(Madhya Pradesh High Court | Sep 6, 2021)

The petitioner has prayed for quashing of the show cause notice dated 30-06-2021, issued by the respondent no.3 and has also prayed for a direction for conducting appropriate enquiry against the concern officer, who bypassing the law just to obtain undue benefits from the petitioner has issued the impugned notice. He has also prayed for quashing of the audit report dated 13-04-2021 (Annexure P-6) under Section 65(6) of GST Act read with Rule 101(5) of CGST Rules prepared by the respondent no....
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
1. The petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed seeking direction for the respondent no.2 to adjudicate the application filed for revocation in accordance with the Order-in-Appeal passed by the respondent no. 3 with the following prayers: - “(A) To Respondent no.2 for giving effect to the order in Appeal passed by Additional Commissioner (Appeals) on 26.10.2020 in a time bound manner and in case there is any technical difficulty being faced then Respondent no...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

MEDHA SERVO DRIVES PRIVATE LIMITED


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

1. M/s. Medha Servo Drives Private Limited, Sy No.780,781, Jodimetla X Roads, Chowdaryguda Village, Ghatkeshar, Korremula, Medchal - Malkajgiri, Telangana- 500088 (GSTIN No. 36AABCM3917A1ZY) has filed an application in FORM GST ARA-01 under Section 97(1) of TGST Act, 2017 read with Rule 104 of CGST/TGST Rules. 2. At the outset, it is made clear that the provisions of both the CGST Act and the TGST Act are the same except for certain provisions. Therefore, unless a mention is specifically ...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

SAPNA GUPTA (M/S UTSAV CORPORATION)


(Authority for Advance Ruling, Rajasthan | Sep 3, 2021)

At the outset, we would like to make it clear that the provisions of both the CGST Act and the RGST Act tire 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 be...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
1. By this writ petition the petitioner has challenged the order Annexure P-9 whereby respondent has only for name sake modified its order dated 16.7.2021 as per the judgment of this Court but in reality continued attachment of Cash Credit Limit Bank Account No. 02102790000782 in HDFC Bank, Yamuna Nagar. 2. The Brief facts of the case are that the respondent No.1 passed an order provisionally attaching bank account of the petitioner on 16.7.2021 under Rule 159 (1) of the GST Rules. The pe...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

BEML LIMITED


(Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, Karnataka | Sep 3, 2021)

PROCEEDINGS (Under Section 101 of the CGST Act, 2017 and the KGST Act, 2017) 1. At the outset we would like to make it clear that the provisions of CGST, Act 2017 and SGST, Act 2017 are in pari materia and have the same provisions in like matter and differ from each other only on a few specific provisions. Therefore, unless a mention is particularly made to such dissimilar provisions, a reference to the CGST Act would also mean reference to the corresponding similar provisio...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in


12
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)).