GST Library

Login | Register

Best GST Library

Contact Us

Subscription Plans

GST News | Updates

GST Calendar

GST Diary

GST Case Laws

GST Case Laws Sitemap

GST Notifications, Circulars, Releases etc.

Act & Rules

Act & Rules (Multi-view)

Act & Rules (E-book)

GST Rates

GST Rates (E-book)

HSN Classification

GST Council Meetings

GST Set-off Calculator

ITC Reversal Calculator

E-invoice Calculator

Inverted Duty Calculator

GSTR-3B Manual

GSTR-9 Manual

GSTR-9C Manual

GST Forms

Full Site Search

E-way Bill

Finance Bill

GST Evasion in India

GST Videos

About Us

Contact Us

Our Services

GST e-books
GST Domains Sale
TaxReply India Pvt Ltd
®
Subscribe Free GST updates on...

Join on twitter

Join GST Group 121

GST Case Laws


Court
High Court
State
Search by Related Tags
  OR

  OR

  OR
Date (From)
Date (To)
Name of Party
Text Search
Text Search option

  9,362 Results

The petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by Ext.P14 series of orders passed against him under the GST Act. In the Writ Petition, among the many grounds on which Ext.P14 series of orders are challenged, the primary contention is that before passing Ext.P14 series of orders, the petitioner was not heard. Taking note of the said submission and finding that in the absence of a hearing extended to the petitioner the impugned orders would be vitiated by a non-compliance with the rules of ...
:

Principle of Natural Justice

:

Opportunity of being heard

GODWAY FURNICRAFTS vs. THE STATE OF AP AND OTHER


(Andhra Pradesh High Court | Nov 11, 2020)

1. The petitioner firm, represented by its proprietrix, was doing business in furniture after obtaining permission and licence from the concerned Departments, including erstwhile Sales Tax Department. When GST Act came into force, the petitioner, along with other dealers, got registered and obtained GST registration number vide registration No.37AABPA9728J1ZJ from the Department, which was with effect from 1.7.2017. The petitioner claims to have opted for paying tax under composite scheme as ...
1. The petitioner is a trader in Steels registered under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (for short 'the Act') having its registered office in Secunderabad. 2. It purchased, in the course of its business, material from M/s. Steel Authority of India Limited (SAIL), Kodambakkam, Tamil Nadu. 3. While the goods were in transit from the place of purchase to the petitioner's business premises at Secunderabad and when the carrier/goods vehicle was en route at Jeedimetla, it was c...
:

Detention of Vehicle & Goods

M/S. BHAVYA ENTERPRISE vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS


(Gauhati High Court | Nov 11, 2020)

1. Heard Mr. D. Saraf, learned counsel, appears for the petitioner and Mr. S.C. Keyal, learned Standing counsel appearing for the respondent nos. 1, 3, 4, 5, 7 and 8 Department of Customs and Excise. Mr. B. Gogoi, learned counsel appears for respondent no. 2, 6 and 9. 2. The petitioner is a sole-proprietorship concern carrying on the business of exports of various Goods and Services to neighbouring countries from India. It is represented by the proprietor, Sri Gaurav Agarwal. After the en...
:

Refund

:

Export of Goods & Services

M/S RP ENTERPRISES vs. STATE OF UP AND OTHERS


(Allahabad High Court | Nov 11, 2020)

The present petition has been filed alleging that the petitioner is a registered dealer under the U.P. GST Act w.e.f. 2.6.2020 and as per the order received from various shop keepers, the petitioner loaded the goods on the vehicle for its transport and delivery to the said purchasers, however, the vehicle of the petitioner were seized on 2.10.2020 merely on the ground that invoice was found to be in the name of some other party. The submission of the counsel for the petitioner is that alt...
:

Detention of Vehicle & Goods

1. The petition has been heard by way of video conferencing. : 2. Present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to the respondents to release the refund qua the refund applications filed by it in respect of export for the months of July and August, 2019. 3. Mr. Priyadarshi Manish, learned counsel for the petitioner states that procured goods had been exported under Section 16 of Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short ‘IGST Act’)...
:

Refund

1. The petition has been heard by way of video conferencing. 2. The petitioner by way of the present writ petition challenges the order dated 01st June, 2020 passed by the Appellate Authority whereby the respondent have denied refund due to the petitioner in spite of the fact that the petitioner had made exports of goods outside India and such exports are regarded as zero rated supplies under Section 16 of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short ‘IGST Act’) ...
:

Refund

M/S. IZ KARTEX


(Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, West Bengal | Nov 10, 2020)

1. This Appeal has been filed by M/s. IZ Kartex named after P. G. Korobkov Ltd. on 17.08.2020 against Advance Ruling No. 04/WBAAR/2020-21 dated 29.06.2020, pronounced by the West Bengal Authority for Advance Ruling (hereinafter referred to as the WBAAR). 2. The appellant IZ-KARTEX named after P.G. Korobkov Ltd., Russian Federation, 196650, Russia, St. Petersburg, Kolpino, Izhorskiy, Zavod entered into a Maintenance and Repair Contract (hereinafter referred to as MARC) with Bharat Cok...
This writ petition has been filed for a Mandamus seeking for a direction to direct the respondents 4 and 5 to grant retrospective registration with effect from 01.07.2017 for petitioner's Registration Certificate dated 07.06.2018 under the Tamil Nadu Goods and Service Tax Act, by considering its representation dated 14.09.2020, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court. 2. Mr.R.Rajaraman, learned Senior Panel Counsel accepts notice for the first respondent, Mr.B.Vijay Karthikeyan,...
:

Registration

The petitioner, who is an assessee to GST on the rolls of the 1st respondent, preferred an application to cancel his registration under the GST regime as he decided to transfer the business as a whole to a 3rd party. Unfortunately for the petitioner, in the application that he had preferred for cancelling the registration, he had inadvertently shown the reason for cancellation as 'discontinuance of business/ closure of business' whereas, in fact the reason ought to have been, "tr...
:

Cancellation of Registration



29
Apr
S
M
T
W
T
F
S
30 Apr

☑ Annual | GSTR-4

GSTR-4 (Annual Return) for FY 2023-24 by Composite Taxpayer (Rule 62).

☑ Quarterly | QRMP

Last date for opt-in / opt-out QRMP Scheme for quarter Apr - June 2024 (Rule 61A)