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

  12,903 Results

JUDGMENT PER   (HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE) Mr. Bathula Raj Kiran, learned Standing Counsel for Excise and Customs for the appellant. Mr. Karan Talwar, learned counsel for the respondent. 2. This appeal under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962, has been filed by the Revenue against the order dated 20.02.2024 in Customs Appeal No.30323 of 2021 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad (hereinafter referred to as, “the ...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
P.C. (PER M.S. SONAK) :- 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The challenge in this petition is to the Order-in-Original dated 29 December 2023 made by the Principal Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise, Pune. 3. The petitioner, in paragraph 29, has made the following averments:- “No other alternate, adequate and equally efficacious remedy is available to the petitioner and the reliefs claimed herein if granted would be complete.” 4. The above av...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
P.C.:- 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that both these petitions can be disposed of by common order since the issue of law and fact are substantially similar. He points out that two petitions were filed because they pertain to two different financial years. 3. The challenge in both these petitions is to the Orders-in-Original made by Deputy Commissioner of State GST. 4. The petitioners have made a bald statement that they...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER M. S. SONAK J) :- 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Rule. The Rule is made returnable immediately at the request of and with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. 3. This petitioner challenges the Order-in-Original dated 30 April 2024 made by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax (State GST). 4. The petitioner has incorrectly stated the non-availability of alternate and efficacious remedies. The learned counsel for the petition...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
P.C. (PER M.S. SONAK, J.) :- 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. By an order dated 12 November 2024, we had disposed of this petition. 3. It is pointed out that the disposal of the petition was based on the orders made by us in Writ Petition No. 4500 of 2024. However, it is now pointed out to us that though this petitioner instituted Writ Petition No. 4500 of 2024, the subject matter of the said petition was different. 4. Thus, we are satisfied that ther...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
PC.:- 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The learned counsel for the Petitioner had already made it clear on 8 October 2024 that the Petitioner would not press for any relief in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b) of this petition. Accordingly, Mr. Rastogi has made no submissions on prayer clauses (a) and (b) and the reliefs in those prayers are therefore rejected. 3. Regarding prayer clause (c), the challenge is to an Order-in-Original dated 12 January 2023. 4. Agai...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
PC.:- 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This petition challenges two orders dated 3 July 2024 by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax. Against both these orders, the Petitioner has the remedy of an appeal. 3. In paragraph 25 of the petition, the Petitioner has admitted that they have such an alternate remedy. Still, it is their case that such a remedy is not efficacious because the orders are passed in violation of natural justice and judgments of the Hon’ble S...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

DHARMENDRA KUMAR vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS


(Allahabad High Court | Dec 9, 2024)

ORDER 1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to the respondents to make payment of GST @ 18%. 2. Submission was made that on account of change in rate of GST instead of 12%, the petitioner was entitled to payment of GST @ 18%, however, only 12% amount was paid to the petitioner. 3. When the matter came up before the Court, time was granted to the respondents to complete instructions, wherein it was indicated that the amount though is due to the ...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

RAM CONSTRUCTIONS vs. UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS


(Jharkhand High Court | Dec 7, 2024)

1. This application has been filed seeking for the following reliefs: a. For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, holding and declaring Section 16(4) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 as ultra vires, inasmuch as, it seeks to restrict the availment of Input Tax Credit, within a time frame, which is being violative of Article 14, Article 19(1)(g) and Article 300A of the Constitution of India and also being violative of the basic structure of the Goods and Servi...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

RAKESH KUMAR vs. STATE TAX OFFICER


(Uttarakhand High Court | Dec 6, 2024)

JUDGMENT ( PER MR . PANKAJ PUROHIT , J. ) Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. By means of this writ petition, petitioner has sought the following reliefs:- "It is therefore, most respectfully prayed, that this Hon'ble High Court shall most graciously be pleased to:- a. Issue a writ, order or direction, in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned Order for Cancellation of Registration bearing Reference No. ZA0512220150146 dated 20/12/2022 (Annexure-1) i...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in


24
Apr
S
M
T
W
T
F
S
24 Apr

☑ Quarterly | GSTR-3B

GSTR-3B for the Quarter Jan - Mar 2025 (QRMP Taxpayers < 5 Cr - Rule 61) - Category II States.  

* State Category II - Himachal Pradesh, Punjab, Uttarakhand, Haryana, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Sikkim, Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland, Manipur, Mizoram, Tripura, Meghalaya, Assam, West Bengal, Jharkhand or Odisha or the Union territories of Jammu and Kashmir, Ladakh, Chandigarh and Delhi.

25 Apr

☑ Half-Yearly | ITC-04

ITC-04 for the half year (Oct - Mar 2025) (For taxpayers > 5 Cr. Turnover) - Rule 45.

☑ Annual | ITC-04

ITC-04 for complete FY 2024-25 (For taxpayers <= 5 Cr. Turnover) - Rule 45.

28 Apr

☑ Monthly | GSTR-11

GSTR-11 for the m/o Mar 2025 (Statement of inward supplies by persons having Unique Identification Number (UIN)).

30 Apr

☑ Quarterly | QRMP

Last date for opt-in / opt-out QRMP Scheme for quarter Apr - June 2025 (Rule 61A)