GST Library
2 Col
3 Col

Login | Register

Best GST Library

Contact Us

Subscribe (Single-user)

Subscribe (Multi-user)

GST News | Updates

GST Calendar

GST Diary (New)

GST Case Laws

GST Case Laws Sitemap

GST Notifications

Act & Rules (Single-view)

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
GST Domains Sale
About Us
Our Services
Contact Us
TaxReply India Pvt Ltd
2.0
Subscribe Free GST updates on...

Join on twitter

7048924208

GST Case Laws


Court
High Court
State
Search by Related Tags
  OR

  OR

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

  7,837 Results

MANOJ STEEL TRADERS vs. STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS


(Allahabad High Court | Aug 23, 2023)

ORDER HON'BLE PIYUSH AGRAWAL, J. 1. Heard Shri Suyash Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned ACSC for the State - respondent. 2. The present writ petition is being entertained in view of the fact that no GST Tribunal has been constituted in the State of U.P. 3. The present writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 23.02.2021 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Grade - 2 (Appeals - 4), Ghaziabad by which the appeal of the pe...

SURENDRA BAHADUR SINGH vs. STATE OF U.P.


(Allahabad High Court | Aug 23, 2023)

ORDER 1. Heard Sri Rishi Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State. 2. Present petition has been filed challenging the order dated 07.01.2023 whereby the registration of the petitioner was cancelled as well as the appellate order dated 01.07.2023 whereby the appeal was dismissed as being beyond the prescribed period of limitation. 3. The facts, in brief, are that the petitioner is a proprietorship concern engaged in civil contrac...

SITA PANDEY vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR & OTHERS


(Patna High Court | Aug 23, 2023)

JUDGMENT ( Per : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE ) 1. “There is a tendency for valiant tax executives clothed with judicial powers to remember their former capacity at the expense of the latter. In a welfare state and in appreciation of the nature of the judicial process, such an attitude, motivated by various reasons, cannot be commended. The penalty for deviance from these norms is the peril to the order passed. The effect of mala fides on exercise of administrative power is well...
COMMON ORDER By this common order all the writ petitions are being disposed of. 2. In W.P.Nos.3873 & 3879 of 2023, the petitioner has challenged the Impugned Order passed by the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (ST) (GST) dated 28.11.2022 declining to condone the delay of 132 days in filing the appeal against the Assessment Order dated 08.12.2021 for the respective assessment years. 3. These Assessment Orders were passed by the second respondent at the time when the country was i...
JUDGMENT DINESH KUMAR SHARMA, J. (Oral) CRL.M.A. 22521/2023 (exemption) Exemption is allowed subject to all just exceptions. W.P.(CRL) 2391/2023 1. The present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of Cr. PC seeking following prayer: “I. Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondent to not arrest the Petitioner in relation to the summons dated 16.08.2023 under section 70 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act,...

VOLTAS LIMITED vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR


(Patna High Court | Aug 23, 2023)

ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) The writ petition challenges the order passed under Section 68(1) read with Section 129(1) of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The said order has raised a demand of Rs. 1,05,656.00 against the petitioner herein through the driver, who was carrying a consignment of goods, sold by the petitioner to another. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner first relied on the Notification issued by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes...

BL PAHARIYA MEDICAL STORE vs. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER


(Allahabad High Court | Aug 22, 2023)

ORDER 1. Heard Sri Aditya Pandey, learned counsel for the assessee and Sri Nimai Das, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State Respondents. 2. In absence of any dispute as to fact, the matter has been proceeded with the consent of parties at the fresh stage itself. 3. Challenge has been raised to the order dated 21.03.2023 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, State Tax, Sector-1, Karvi, for the tax period July 2017 to March 2018, whereby demand in excess to Rs. 26 Lac...

PUNEET SONKAR vs. STATE OF HARYANA


(Punjab and Haryana High Court | Aug 22, 2023)

JASJIT SINGH BEDI , J. (ORAL) The prayer in this second petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is for the grant of the regular bail to the petitioner in FIR No. 401 dated 12.10.2018 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 201 and 120-B IPC registered at Police Station Farakpur, District Yamuna Nagar, Haryana. 2. The brief facts of the case are that Bhupender Nath, Excise and Taxation officer, gave a complaint to Superintendent of Police, Yamuna Nagar for taking legal action against Rayyan s/o ...
VIBHU BAKHRU, J. 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition being aggrieved by the denial of refund of unutilized input tax credit in respect of “zero rated supplies”, in accordance with Section 16 of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereafter ‘the IGST Act’). 2. The petitioner is engaged in the business of providing book keeping, payroll, and accounting services through the use of cloud technology to its affiliated entity (TC Outsourcing ...

DIGINX TRADER vs. STATE OF U.P.


(Allahabad High Court | Aug 22, 2023)

ORDER 1. Heard Sri Shubham Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Ankur Agarwal, learned counsel representing the Respondent No.2 and learned Standing Counsel, who has accepted notice on behalf of the State Respondent No.1. 2. The writ petition is aggrieved by the penalty order dated 5.8.223 passed by the Assistant Commissioner-Rampur, Respondent No.2 in Form MOV-09 under Section 129(1)(b) of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 whereby and whereunder penalty of Rs. 72,76,50...