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

  13,194 Results

RAMESWAR UDYOG PVT. LTD. vs. UNION OF INDIA


(Gujarat High Court | Mar 18, 2021)

1. By this writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the writ applicants have prayed for the following reliefs:- “(A) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order directing the learned respondents to forthwith allow necessary amendments in the GST portal in respect of 14 pending export invoices and also forthwith grant pending refund of ₹ 38,84,875/- in respect of...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
1. By this writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the writ applicants have prayed for the following reliefs:- "(A) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order directing the learned respondents to forthwith grant transitional credit under Section 140(1) of the CGST Act in the electronic credit ledger of the amount of carry forward credit of ₹ 12,30,843/- under t...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
This appeal has been filed under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) by Sh.Gurpreet Singh Madaan, E-133, Bhiwadi Industrial Area, Alwar-301019  (Raj) (hereinafter also referred to as the "appellant") against the Order No.ZA0812200002486 dated 01.12.2020 (hereinafter referred to as the "impugned order") passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Central Goods and Service Tax Division-C, Bhiwadi, Alwar...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

NAVNEET R. JHANWAR vs. STATE TAX OFFICER AND OTHERS


(Jammu and Kashmir High Court | Mar 17, 2021)

1. The petitioner is aggrieved of and has called in question the refund rejection order passed by respondent No.1 on 02.12.2020 on the ground that the same besides being in utter disregard of the provisions of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 ["the Act"] and the Rules framed thereunder, is also in violation of the principles of natural justice. 2. It is submitted that the petitioner having become entitled for refund of excess tax paid in term of Section 54 of the Act,...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
1. Heard Sri Aloke Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Jagdish Mishra, learned Standing Counsel for the State. 2. Present petition has been filed to challenge the order dated 18.6.2020 passed by the appellate authority under the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). By that order, the appeal authority has partly allowed the appeal no. 12 of 2020, arising from the proceedings under Section 130(2) of the Act. 3. While the expl...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
This appeal has been filed under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) by Sh. Kana Ram Raiger (M/s Sagar Enterprises),D-61, Phase-III, Jhalana Dungri, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur-302017 (hereinafter also referred to as the "appellant") against the Order No.ZA081120039652W dated 18.11.2020 (hereinafter referred to as the "impugned order") passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Central Goods and Service Tax Div...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

SHIV SANKARA HEALTH CARE ENTERPRISES


(Authority for Advance Ruling, Tamilnadu | Mar 16, 2021)

Note: Any appeal against the Advance Ruling order shall be filed before the Tamil Nadu State Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, Chennai under Sub-section (1) of Section 100 of CGST ACT/TNGST Act 2017 within 30 days from the date on which the ruling sought to he appealed against is communicated. At the outset, we would like to make it clear that the provisions of both the Central Goods and Service Tax Act and the Tamil Nadu Goods and Service Tax Act are the same except for certain pro...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

BHARTI AIRTEL LIMITED, BHARTI TELEMEDIA LTD vs. UNION OF INDIA


(Andhra Pradesh High Court | Mar 16, 2021)

We have heard Mr. Tarun Gulati, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. Nikhil Gupta, representing Mr. Srinivasa Rao Kudupudi – learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Mr. N. Harinath, learned Assistant Solicitor General for respondents 1 and 3, Mr. Y. N. Vivekananda, learned Government Pleader attached to the Office of the learned Additional Advocate General-II for respondents 2, 5 and 6 and Mr. Suresh Kumar Routhu, learned standing counsel for respondent No.4. 2. In these tw...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
This appeal has been filed under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) by Sh. Nitin Gupta, (M/s US Software) 67/92, Sec-6, Sheopur Road, Jaipur- 302033 (hereinafter also referred to as the "appellant") against the Order No.ZA0811200394413 dated 18.11.2020 (hereinafter referred to as the "impugned order") passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Central Goods and Service Tax Division-F, Jaipur (hereinafter...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

SRI LAKSHMI VENKATESWARA vs. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH


(Andhra Pradesh High Court | Mar 15, 2021)

In the instant writ petition, the petitioner challenges the AJC order No.4959/29.1.2020 dated 11.12.2019 served on 22.02.2020 passed by the 3rd respondent rejecting the appeal filed by the petitioner against the assessment order dated 30.05.2018 passed by the 4th respondent. 2. The petitioner deals in edible and non-edible oils and it is a registered dealer under the APGST Act, 2017. a) The 4th respondent consequent to the inspection of petitioner’s business premises on 03.02.20...
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in


17
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)).