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

  12,949 Results

SMT. KANISHKA MATTA vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS


(Madhya Pradesh High Court | Aug 26, 2020)

The petitioner before this Court has filed this present petition for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondent No.4 – Assistant Director, DGGSTI, Indore and respondent No.5 – Senior Intelligence Officer, DGGSTI, Indore to release the cash amounting to ₹ 66,43,130/- seized from the petitioner vide Panchnama dated 30/05/2020 from the residential premises of the petitioner and her husband. 02-The petitioner is the wife of Shri Sanjay Matta. Sh...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

UNI WELL EXIM vs. STATE OF GUJARAT


(Gujarat High Court | Aug 26, 2020)

1. Heard Mr. Hardik Modh, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Dharmesh Devnani, learned AGP on advance copy for respondent State. 2. By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has mainly prayed as under: “11(a) That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue a Writ or Mandamus, or a Writ in the nature of Mandamus, or any other appropriate Order or direction for calling upon the refund application dated 24.12.2019&nb...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
The subject Service Tax appeal has been filed by Mr. Haresh V Kagrana (HUF) having address at 304, Shalaka, Near Mayur Hotel, Juhu Road, Santacruz (W), Mumbai- 400 054 (hereinafter referred to as the Appellant). The Appellant, who is a non assessee and not holding Service Tax Registration, has filed appeal against the Order-ln-Original No. CGST/MUM(W)/R-107/2019-20 dated 06.12.2019 passed by the Deputy Commissioner (Refund), CGST & CX, Mumbai West (hereinafter referred to as the Responden...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

M/S. TATA MOTORS LIMITED


(Authority for Advance Ruling, Maharashtra | Aug 25, 2020)

PROCEEDINGS (Under Section 98 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017) 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 J by M/s. Tata Motors Limited, the applicant, seeking an advance ruling in respect of the following questions. 1. W...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
The petitioner has approached this Court challenging Ext.P6 penalty order passed under Section 130 of the GST Act. During the pendency of the Writ petition the petitioner preferred Ext.P11 appeal before the 3rd respondent against Ext.P6 penalty order. The limited prayer now is for a direction to the 3 rd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P11 appeal expeditiously, and to keep in abeyance recovery steps for the balance amounts recoverable from the petitioner pursuant to Ext.P6 penal...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

SH. VASANTBHAI BHIKABHAI PATEL vs. M/S. SHREE INFRA


(National Anti Profiteering Authority | Aug 25, 2020)

1. The brief facts of the present case are that the Applicant No. 2 (here-in-after referred to as the DGAP) vide his Report dated 24.04.2019, furnished to this Authority under Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods & Services Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017, had submitted that he had conducted an investigation on the complaint of the Applicant No. 1 and found that the Respondent had not passed on the benefit of Input Tax Credit in respect of the flat purchased by him in the “River View Heights&rd...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

DRIVE DIGITAL vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER, CGST DIVISION-B


(First Appellate Authority, Jaipur | Aug 24, 2020)

This appeal has been filed under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 by M/s Drive Digital, F-2, Plot No. 167, Kardhani Scheme, Govindpura Kalwar Road, Jaipur (hereinafter also referred to as "the appellant") against the Order-in-Original No.36/GST/ITC/DD/2019-20 dated 12.07.2019 (hereinafter called as the "impugned order") passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Central Goods & Service Tax Division-B, Jaipur(hereinafter called as the "adjudica...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

TRUCITY DEVELOPERS LLP


(Authority for Advance Ruling, Rajasthan | Aug 24, 2020)

Note: Under Section 100 of the CGST/RGST Act, 2017, an appeal against this ruling lies before the Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling constituted under section 99 of CGST/RGST Act, 2017, within a period of 30 days from the date of service of this order. • At the outset, we would like to make it clear that the provisions of both the GST Act and the RGST Act are the same except for certain provisions. Therefore, unless a mention is specifically made to such dissimilar provisions, a ...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

JEET & JEET GLASS AND CHEMICALS PVT. LTD.


(Authority for Advance Ruling, Rajasthan | Aug 24, 2020)

Note: Under Section 100 of the CGST/ RGST Act, 2017, an appeal against this ruling lies before the Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling constituted under section 99 of CGST/ RGST Act, 2017, within a period of 30 days from the date of service of this order. • 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,...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

ANONYMOUS vs. M/S. ARYAN HOMETEC PVT. LTD.


(National Anti Profiteering Authority | Aug 24, 2020)

1. The present Report dated 31.01.2020 has been received from the Applicant No. 2 i.e. the Director General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP) after a detailed investigation, under Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods & Service Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017. The brief facts of the case are that the Applicant No. 1, who has sought anonymity, had filed an application under Rule 128 (1) of the CGST Rules, 2017 against the Respondent alleging profiteering in respect of construction service supplied by him. Th...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in


30
Apr
S
M
T
W
T
F
S
30 Apr

☑ Quarterly | QRMP

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