Home      Free WhatsApp Updates      Services      Subscription Plans
🔒 Login    

Composition Scheme under GST

    

Treatment of Job Work in GST and Form ITC-04

    

Paver blocks laid down for parking of cars to avoid quicker wear & tear due to accumulation of water & dust amounts to construction of immovable property and not eligible for GST Input: Says AAR

    

Rule 36(4) - Buyer's ITC at the mercy of supplier?

    

High Court stayed interest, penalty and further investigation of other products of Whirlpool in response to writ filed by them.

    

Poultry Meal to attract 5% GST whereas Poultry Fat to attract 12% GST: Says AAR

    

GST on lease premium charges, annual lease rentals and maintenance charges paid on lease of land for own bulding construction is restricted and not eligible for ITC as per section 17(5)(d): Says AAR

    

Supply of food to Hospital on outsourcing basis to hospital patients shall be chargeable to 5% GST with no input w.e.f. 27.07.2018: Says AAR

    

GST Profiteering of Rs. 1,57,200 established in the case of supply of Duracell Battery AA/6 by respondent.

    

Revocation of GST Registration Applications

    
View all
Subscription Plans   
TaxReply.com - Free Tax updates for All
GST Library
Taxreply tweets
GST News
About GST Library
E-Books
Subscription Plans
Offers New
GST Rates Reckoner
Classification of Goods and Services
Classification of Goods and Services (Search)
Free Trial
GST Set-off Calculator
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 (All) ✓
↳ AAR Orders
↳ AAAR Orders
↳ NAA Orders
↳ High Court Orders
↳ Supreme Court Orders
GST Forms   
E-way Bill
↳ E-way Notifications
↳ E-way Bill News
↳ E-way Bill Rules
↳ E-way Bill FAQ
Finance Bill
GST Case Laws - Advance Search Tool
Total 3,086 cases mapped to 11,375 Sections/Rules/Notifications/HSN
TR Citation -TR-
Court
State
Search by Related Tags
  OR

  OR

  OR
Date (From)
Date (To)
Name of Party
Free-Text Search
Sort By

Text Search option  


148 Result  

GST Case Laws

D.S. BROTHERS... vs. M/S. DURGA MARKETING PVT. LTD.... [2020 (7) TR 3165]

NAA | Jul 23, 2020 | 42/2020

1. The present Report dated 18.12.2019 had 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 an application was filed by the Applicant No. 1 before the Standing Committee on Anti-profiteering, under Rule 128 of the CGST Rules, 2017 alleging profiteering by the Respondent in respect of the supply of “D

DIRECTOR GENERAL OF ANTI-PROFITEERING... vs. M/S. GAURAV SHARMA FOOD INDUSTRIES... [2020 (7) TR 2712]

NAA | Jul 16, 2020 | 41/2020

1. The present Report dated 31.12.2019 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 01.07.2019 recommending a detailed investigation in respect of an application, originally examined by the Rajasthan State Screening Committee on Anti-profiteering under Rule 128 (2)

SHRI JAI PRAKASH GARG... vs. M/S ADARSH THOUGHT WORKS PVT. LTD.... [2020 (7) TR 2695]

NAA | Jul 10, 2020 | 39/2020

1. The Present Report dated 10.12.2019, has been received from the Applicant No. 2 i.e. the Director General of Asti-Profiteering (DGAP), under Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods & Services Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017 in which it has been stated that an application dated 12.08.2018 was filed before the Rajasthan State Screening Committee on Anti-profiteering under Rule 128 (2) of the CGST Rules, 2017, by the Applicant No. 1 alleging profiteering by the Respondent in respect of purchase of a fla

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL TAX & CENTRAL EXCI... vs. PRASAD MEDIA CORPORATION PVT. LTD.... [2020 (7) TR 2647]

NAA | Jul 7, 2020 | 37/2020

1. The present Report dated 30.10.2019 has been received from the Applicant No. 2, i.e. the Director-General of Anti-profiteering (DGAP) after a detailed investigation in line With Rue 129 (6) of the central Goods & Service Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017. The brief facts of the present case are that the Applicant No, 1 had filed an application dated 28.01.2019 under Rule 128 of the CGST Rules, 2017 alleging profiteering by the Respondent in respect of the supply of “Services by way of admis

SH. SHIVAM AGARWAL... vs. M/S. GAURSONS REALTECH PVT. LTD.... [2020 (7) TR 2652]

NAA | Jul 7, 2020 | 38/2019

1. The investigation Report dated 23.102018 was received from the Applicant No. 2, the Director General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP) under Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods & Service Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017. The brief facts of the case were that the Uttar Pradesh State Screening Committee on Anti-profiteering had forwarded an application filed by the Applicant No, 1 to the Standing Committee on Anti-profiteering under Rule 128 (2) of the CGST Rules, 2017, as per the minutes of its meeting h

SMT. HONEY MACKER... vs. M/S. PIVOTAL INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.... [2020 (6) TR 2589]

NAA | Jun 26, 2020 | 35/2020

1. The present Report dated 27.12.2019 has been received from the Applicant No. 2 i.e. the Director General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP) after detailed investigation under Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods & Service Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017. The brief facts of the case are that vide her application dated 03.08.2018 filed before the Standing Committee on Anti-profiteering under Rule 128 of the CGST Rules, 2017, the Applicant No. 1 had alleged profiteering by the Respondent in respect of purch

SHRI M. SRINIVAS... vs. M/S. VIJETHA SUPERMARKETS PVT. LTD.... [2020 (6) TR 2590]

NAA | Jun 26, 2020 | 34/2020

1 The present Report dated 23.12.2019, 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 had filed an application alleging profiteering by the Respondent in respect of the product “Frozen Green Peas” supplied by him. The Applicant had alleged that the Respondent had not r

SH. PUNEET BANSAL & MS. VANITA BANSAL... vs. M/S. EMAAR MGF LAND LTD.... [2020 (6) TR 2588]

NAA | Jun 25, 2020 | 33/2020

1. The present Report dated 28.10.2019 has been received from the Applicant No. 3 i.e. the Director General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP) after detailed investigation under Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods & Service Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017. The brief facts of the case are that vide their application dated 25.03.2019 filed before the Standing Committee on Anti-profiteering under Rule 128 (1) of the CGST Rules, 2017, the Applicant No. 1 and the Applicant No. 2 had alleged profiteering by the