Payment Failure - GST Library by TaxReply.com
Home      Free WhatsApp Updates      Have a Query?      Refer and Earn?      Other Services
Login | Register    

FAQ on GSTR-9C released by ICAI Indirect Tax Committee

    

Goods and Services Tax (GST) evasion

    

Gujrat High Court admits appeal on last date to avail ITC for July 2017 to March 2018

    

Hunt for missing taxpayers under GST?

    

Removal of difficulty order regarding extension of due date for filing of Annual return in FORM GSTR-9, GSTR-9A and GSTR-9C

    

Johnson company found guilty for not passing the benefit of GST reduction from 28% to 18%

    

31st GST Council meeting will be held on December 22, 2018 in New Delhi.

    

CBIC Press Release on effective tax rate on complex, building and flats in Pre-GST and Post-GST Regime.

    

Extension of due date for filing FORM GSTR-9, FORM GSTR-9A and FORM GSTR-9C

    

New Functionality update on GST Portal : Appeal to the AAAR in Form GST ARA-03 against the order of AAR

    

GSTR-9 and GSTR-9C due date is almost near but the utility to file the same is still awaited ?

    

For GSTP Examination on 17.12.2018, candidates enrolled upto 04.12.2018 will be eligible to register, instead of 26.11.2018, as notified earlier

    

GST Council is likely to launch one-time amnesty scheme to facilitate exit for Nil filers and Non-filers

    

New Simplified GST Return Forms are likely to be rolled out from 1st April 2019

    

Updated version of GST Concept and Status and PPT on GST by CBIC (updated as on 01.12.2018)

    

CBIC has released an Updated FAQ on TCS under GST as on 30.11.2018

    

CBIC extended due date for filing GSTR-7 for the months of October 2018 to December 2018

    

Extension of due date for filing GSTR-4 in Srikakulam district of Andhra Pradesh

    

Extension of due date for filing GSTR-1 (having aggregate turnover upto Rs.1.5 Crore) in Srikakulam district of Andhra Pradesh

    

Extension of due date for filing GSTR-1 in some districts of Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh

     View all
View all
Home       Login    Pay

GST Case Laws
TaxReply.com - Free Tax updates for All
GST Library TM
About GST Library
GST Library Pricing
Free Trial
Full Site Search
GST Act / Rules
GST Act / Rules - Latest Amendments
GST Amendment Statistics
GST Notifications / Circulars Press Releases +
National Anti-Profiteering Authority
GST Case Laws
↳ GST AAR Orders
↳ GST AAAR Orders
↳ GST NAA Orders
GST Forms   
E-way Bill
↳ E-way Bill Notificaitons
↳ E-way Bill News
↳ E-way Bill Rules
↳ E-way Bill FAQ
GST Rates for goods and services
GST Calendar / Due Dates
GST Set-off Calculator
GST News / Articles
Finance Bill
Advance Search Tool
TR Citation -TR-
Court
State
Classification of Goods / Services
Related Section / Rule / Notification / HSN / SAC   OR     OR  
In Favour of   
Date (From)
Date (To)
Petitioner / Applicant / Respondent's Name
Free-Text Search
Sort By

Text Search option  


GST Case Laws

Found: 317 Result  

PUSHPAK CHAUHAN vs. ARISH BAKERS & CONFECTIONERS PVT. LTD. [2018 (12) TR 2]

Court: NAA | State: Not Applicable | Dt: 07-12-2018 | | Order No.17/201

1. The present Report dated 18.06.2018 has been received from the Director General of Safeguards, now Director General of Anti-Profiteering (here-in-after referred to as the DGAP) after detailed investigation under Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods & Services Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017. The brief facts of the case are that vide his application dated 29.11.2017 the Applicant No. 1 had complained to the Standing Committee, constituted under Rule 123 (1) of the above Rules alleging that although

DIRECTOR GENERAL OF ANTI-PROFITEERING vs. J.P. AND SONS [2018 (12) TR 1]

Court: NAA | State: Not Applicable | Dt: 06-12-2018 | In favour of Revenue | Order No.16/2018

1. This report dated 31.072018, has been received from the Director General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP) under Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods and Service Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017. The brief facts of the present case are that the Standing Committee vide the minutes of it’s meeting dated 13.042018 had requested the DGAP to initiate investigation under Rule 129 (1) of the CGST Rules, 2017 on the allegation that the Respondent had not passed on the benefit of tax reduction from 28% to 18%,

CROWN EXPRESS DENTAL LAB vs. THECO INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [2018 (11) TR 3]

Court: NAA | State: Not Applicable | Dt: 28-11-2018 | In favour of Revenue | Order No.15/2018

1. This investigation Report dated 30.08.2018 has been received from the Applicant No. 2 i.e. Director General of Anti-Profiteering (here-in- after referred to as the DGAP) on 31.08.2018 under Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods & Services Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017. The facts of the present case, in brief, are that the Standing Committee on Anti- profiteering had recommended an investigation on an application dated 06.02.2018 (Annexure-2) filed by the Applicant No. 1 relating to the purchase o

SMT. MANDALIKA SAKUNTHALA vs. MIS FABINDIA OVERSEAS PVT. LTD. [2018 (11) TR 1]

Court: NAA | State: Not Applicable | Dt: 16-11-2018 | In favour of Assessee | Order No.13/2018

ORDER 1. The present report dated 16.08.2018 has been received from the Directorate General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP) after detailed investigation under Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods & Services Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017. The brief facts of the case are that two applications, both dated 21.02.2018, were filed by the Applicant No.1 before the Standing Committee constituted under Rule 123 (1) of the above Rules alleging that the Respondent had not passed on the benefit of reduction in

RAVI CHARAYA, CHANDRANATH SARKAR, SHREEPAD SHENDE, JAYASANKAR VENKATRAMANI vs. HARDCASTLE RESTAURANTS PVT. LTD. [2018 (11) TR 2]

Court: NAA | State: Not Applicable | Dt: 16-11-2018 | In favour of Assessee | Order No.14/2018

ORDER 1. This report dated 15.06.2018 has been received from the Applicant No. 5 i.e. the Director General of Safeguards (DGSG), now re-designated as Director General of Anti-Profiteering (hereinafter referred to as the DGAP) under Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods & Services Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017. The brief facts of the present case are that the Applicants No. 1 & 2 through their emails both dated 23.11.2017 and Applicants No. 3 & 4 vide their emails dated 15.11.2017 and 17.

DIRECTOR GENERAL ANTI-PROFITEERING vs. AMWAY INDIA ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED [2018 (10) TR 4]

Court: NAA | State: Not Applicable | Dt: 29-10-2018 | In favour of Assessee | Order No.12/2018

1. This report dated 30.07.2018, has been received from the Applicant No. 2 i.e. Director General of Safeguards (DGSG) now re-designated as Director General Anti-Profiteering (DGAP), under Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods & Services Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017. The brief facts of the present case are that the Applicant No. 1 through his email (rss342786@tatamotors.com) dated 22.11.17 mentioning neither his name nor the contact address had alleged profiteering against the above Respondent. The

RAMAN KHAIRA vs. YUM RESTAURANTS INDIA PVT. LTD. [2018 (10) TR 5]

Court: NAA | State: Not Applicable | Dt: 29-10-2018 | In favour of Assessee | Order No.11/2018

1. This report dated 30.07.2018 has been received from the Applicant No. 2, i.e. Director General of Safeguards (DGSG), now re-designated as Director General Anti-Profiteering (DGAP), under Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods & Services Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017. The brief facts of the present case are that the Applicant No. 1 vide his email dated 12.12.2017 had alleged that the Respondent No. 1 had not passed on the benefit of reduction of tax from 18% to 5% to his customers. He had also alle

FIVE STAR SHIPPING [2018 (10) TR 7]

Court: AAAR | State: Maharashtra | Dt: 23-10-2018 | In favour of Assessee | Classification of Services | Order No.MAH/AAAR/SS-RJ/11/2018-19

PROCEEDINGS (Under Section 101 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017) At the outset, we would like to make it clear that the provisions of both the CGST Act and the MGST Act are 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 provisions under the MGST Act. The present appeal has be

BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED [2018 (10) TR 6]

Court: AAR | State: Kerala | Dt: 20-10-2018 | In favour of Assessee | Order No.KER/21/2018

The applicant is d Public sector undertaking operating oil refinery and producers of several petroleum products. For carrying out the refining activity of petroleum products. the applicant requires industrial Gases such as Hydrogen, Nitrogen and Steam. he industrial Gases ate obtained from inputs such us ‘Re-gasified Liquefied Natural (Gas (RLNG). De-mineralized water (DM Water), Hydrogen Rich oft Gas and raw water’. The applicant allowed M/s. Prodair Air Products Pvt. Ltd. to put

RODAIR AIR PRODUCTS INDIA (P.) LTD [2018 (10) TR 9]

Court: AAR | State: Kerala | Dt: 20-10-2018 | In favour of Assessee | Order No.KER/22/2018

The applicant is a manufacturer of industrial gases such as Hydrogen, Nitrogen, Oxygen etc. The applicant set up an industrial gases plant adjacent to Bharath Petroleum Corporation Ltd, who is the sole customer. The plant is owned and operated by the applicant on the land owned by BPCL on lease rent basis. The applicant manufactures Industrial Gases using various inputs such as natural gas, de-mineralized water, raw water etc supplied by the customer BPCL. Certain quantum of natural gas provi