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

SHRI M. SRINIVAS vs. M/S. PVR LTD


(National Anti Profiteering Authority | Aug 24, 2020)

1. The present Report dated 31.01.2020 has been furnished by the Director General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP), under Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods & Services Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017. The brief facts of the case are that a reference was received by the DGAP from the Standing Committee on Anti-Profiteering on 05.08.2019 to conduct a detailed investigation in respect of an application filed by the Applicant No. 1, under Rule 128 (1) of the CGST Rules, 2017, alleging profiteering by the Re...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

SH. RATISH NAIR vs. M/S. MAN REALTY LTD


(National Anti Profiteering Authority | Aug 24, 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 03.04.2019, 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 “One Park Avenue&rdquo...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

SH. PRANESH PATHAK vs. M/S. BHUTANI INTERNATIONAL MEDICOS


(National Anti Profiteering Authority | Aug 24, 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 29.03.2019, 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 reduction in the rate of GST from 12% to Nil in respect of supply of “Sanitary Napkins...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

SHRI ANKUR JAIN vs. KUNJ LUB MARKETING PVT. LTD


(National Anti Profiteering Authority | Aug 24, 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 05.07.2018, 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 reduction in the rate of GST from 18% to 12% in respect of the product ‘Maggi Noodles ...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
As these writ petitions involve a common issue, they are taken up for consideration together and disposed by this common judgment. 2. The petitioners have approached this Court through the present writ petitions at various stages during an investigation that is ongoing into the affairs of the petitioners under the GST Act, at the instance of the respondents. In the writ petition, it is the case of the petitioners that their request for copies of documents, that were seized by the responde...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
The present Writ Petition came to be filed seeking issuance of writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to open the GSTN portal and enable the petitioner to file the TRAN-1 form and avail the credit of excise duty and cess of ₹ 79,77,785/- as input tax credit of GST, or in the alternative, to permit the petitioner to submit manually GST TRAN-1 form and allow credit of input tax. 2. The facts in issue are as under : The petitioner is a dealer of Hyundai cars and ancillary services....
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

RANJIT SINGH vs. STATE OF HARYANA


(Punjab and Haryana High Court | Aug 21, 2020)

Present petition, filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., seek quashing of the condition in order dated 08.04.2020 (Annexure P-2), passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Panipat whereby, while granting bail to the petitioner, he has been directed to furnish bail bonds of ₹ 50,00,000/- with one surety of like amount, to the satisfaction of the Learned Ilaqa Magistrate/Duty Magistrate. Similarly, he has been directed to pay the outstanding liability of ₹ 1,94,78,017/- along with interest which is ...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

PRASANNA KUMAR BISOI vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS


(Orissa High Court | Aug 21, 2020)

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.T.K.Satpathy, learned counsel for Central Excise. 2. The grievance of the petitioner in this Writ Petition is that he is registered under Central Goods and Service Tax having GSTIN No.21AJIPB2032N1ZO. He has filed the returns for the financial year 2017-18, 20018-19 and 2019-20 at belated stage and availed Input Tax Credit at the time of filing GSTR-3B returns, as Works Contractor. The Superintendent, Central GST and Central Excise, Berhampu...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

KERALA STATE SCREENING COMMITTEE ON ANTI-PROFITEER.. vs. M/S. VTWO VENTURES


(National Anti Profiteering Authority | Aug 21, 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 05 12.2018, 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 to his recipients, the benefit of reduction in the rate of tax of GST w.e.f. 15.11.2017 from 28% to 18% in ...
Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
The petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by Ext.P5(c) order of detention that was issued to it detaining a consignment of lubricant oil that was being transported at its instance. On a perusal of Ext.P5(c) detention order, it is seen that the objection of the 1st respondent is that the consignee was shown as an unregistered person in the e-way bill that accompanied the transportation of the goods. That apart, it is also pointed out that the petitioner had collected CGST and SGST in ...
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)