|
Advanced Search Options
GST - Case Laws
Showing 141 to 156 of 156 Records
-
2020 (2) TMI 280 - GUWAHATI HIGH COURT
Extension of date for filing of the GST Annual Return and GST Audit Form (Form 9 and Form 9C) - transition to GST regime - HELD THAT:- It is the conceded position that the date for filing return has been extended till 7.2.2020. In such circumstances, no adjudication is required on the petition.
This petition is disposed of however, binding the respondent Union of India to take a decision on the representation to be filed on behalf of the petitioners, within one week of its filing.
-
2020 (2) TMI 279 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Stay on operation of the direction issued by the authority - profiteering - HELD THAT:- Stay on operation is granted - the respondents are not restrained from undertaking an enquiry if justified, independent of the directions issued in the impugned order as aforenoted. The deposit made by the petitioner in terms of the impugned order shall be subject to further orders in the writ petition.
List on 16.09.2020.
-
2020 (2) TMI 278 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Reopening of portal for filing of TRAN-1 Form - carry forward of input tax credit from pre-GST regime - transition to GST regime - HELD THAT:- We have permitted the advocates for the Petitioners to address on the challenge to the Rule. The Respondents have completed their oral arguments. The learned counsel for the Petitioners seek time for rejoinder on the issue of the validity of the Rule.
Petition to stand over to 13 February 2020 at 3.00 p.m.
-
2020 (2) TMI 277 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Release of detained goods alongwith the vehicle - violation of procedures for inspection and seizure as clearly enumerated in section 67, 68 & 129 of the Act - principles of natural justice - HELD THAT:- It is ordered that the vehicle and goods detained in pursuance of the impugned Ext.P4 order shall be immediately released by the 1st respondent to the petitioner on his furnishing bank guarantee for the amounts shown in Ext.P4 - Thereafter, the 1st respondent will duly take up the matter for finalisation of adjudication proceedings pursuant to Ext.P4 and shall afford adequate opportunity of being heard to the petitioner through their representative/counsel, if any and then will pass orders finalising such adjudication proceedings, without much delay, preferably within a period of 6 weeks from the date of production of the certified copy of this judgment.
Petition disposed off.
-
2020 (2) TMI 276 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Levy of IGST on Ocean Freight - Reverse Charge - Vires of N/N. 8/2017-Integrated Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 and Entry 10 of the Notification No.10/2017 Integrated Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 - services supplied by a person located in non-taxable territory by way of transportation of goods by a vessel from a place outside India up to the customs station of clearance in India - HELD THAT:- This petition need not be adjudicated further in view of the decision in the case of MOHIT MINERALS PVT LTD VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & 1 OTHER [2020 (1) TMI 974 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] where it was held that The impugned Notification No.8/2017 – Integrated Tax (Rate) dated 28th June 2017 and the Entry 10 of the N/N.10/2017 – Integrated Tax (Rate) dated 28th June 2017 are declared as ultra vires the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, as they lack legislative competency. Both the Notifications are hereby declared to be unconstitutional .
Application disposed off.
-
2020 (2) TMI 275 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Release of confiscated goods alongwith the truck - legality and validity of the order passed by the authority in the Form GST MOV-11. - interpretation of Sections 129 and 130 of the GST Act - HELD THAT:- As regards the legality and validity of the impugned order of confiscation in the Form GST MOV-11, the submissions of petitioner can be agreed upon.
The impugned order of confiscation in Form GST MOV-11 is hereby quashed and set aside. The matter is remitted to the respondent No.2 for fresh consideration so far as the issue of confiscation is concerned - the writ application is allowed in part.
-
2020 (2) TMI 274 - PATNA HIGH COURT
Levy of Interest - whether there is any shortfall in payment of tax / GST - input tax credit - HELD THAT:- Let the authorities examine the issue and the benefits accorded to the writ petitioner in the judgement M/S COMMERCIAL STEEL ENGINEERING CORPORATION VERSUS THE STATE OF BIHAR, THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAXES PATLIPUTRA CIRCLE, PATNA, THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAXES PATLIPUTRA CIRCLE, PATNA [2019 (7) TMI 1452 - PATNA HIGH COURT], be also made available to the instant writ petitioner. We clarify that all issues are left open to be considered by the authorities with regard to the petitioner’s entitlement.
-
2020 (2) TMI 216 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Provisional attachment of bank account of petitioner - no proceedings U/Ss 62, 63, 64, 67, 73 and 74 against the Petitioner as mentioned under Section 83 of CGST Act are pending - HELD THAT:- The issue decided in the case of KAISH IMPEX PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA, THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER CGST & CENTRAL EXCISE, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF CGST RANGE (IV) , [2020 (1) TMI 933 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] where it was held that The bank account of the taxable person can be attached against whom the proceedings under the sections mentioned above are initiated. Section 83 does not provide for an automatic extension to any other taxable person from an inquiry specifically launched against a taxable person under these provisions.
Only upon contingencies provided therein that the power under section 83 can be exercised. This power is to be used in only limited circumstances and it is not an omnibus power.
Order of attachment set aside - petition allowed.
-
2020 (2) TMI 215 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Provisional release of goods with conveyance - requirement of appropriate application under Section 67(6) of the GST Act, 2017 - HELD THAT:- This petition is disposed of by directing the respondents authorities to consider the application to be made by the petitioner for provisional release of the goods and vehicle in accordance with law. The respondents authorities will decide such application as expeditiously as possibly preferably within two weeks from the date of receipt of such application of the petitioner.
Petition disposed off.
-
2020 (2) TMI 171 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Release of petitioner goods without collecting any tax or penalty or security under S.129(1)(c) - discrepancy in E-way bill - HELD THAT:- The matter in relation to the detention of the goods as per the impugned Ext.P7 proceedings will have to be subjected to adjudication proceedings and only thereafter it can be finalised. Therefore, this Court need not make any final pronouncement on any of the above said issues. It is for the petitioner to raise all those contentions as and when he is given opportunity of hearing prior to the finalisation of the adjudication proceedings pursuant to the detention proceedings referred to in Ext.P7.
The respondents do not have any case that the petitioner concern has any previous adverse records of tax evasions of non-compliance of the tax laws. The above said contentions raised by the petitioner on the basis of Ext.P2 E-Way bill is substantially strong to persuade this Court that the goods could be released on condition that the petitioner executes a simple bond in that regard. Hence, it is ordered that the 1st respondent shall immediately release the goods and vehicle detained pursuant to Ext.P7 order to the petitioner on the petitioner executing a simple bond in that regard. However, the 1st respondent will be at liberty to proceed further with the adjudication proceedings in relation to Ext.P7 order and for that purpose, notice of hearing may be given to the petitioner and the petitioner should be permitted to give detailed written submissions in the matter.
It is ordered that all the contentions raised by the petitioner herein and any of the contentions that may be raised by the petitioner before the 1st respondent should be duly adverted to and considered by the 1st respondent before he passes orders finalising the adjudication proceedings in that regard.
It is ordered that the goods and vehicle detained pursuant to Ext.P7 shall be released forthwith by the 1st respondent to the petitioner, on his executing a simple bond and without insisting on the petitioner furnishing bank guarantee for the demanded value - the 1st respondent will take necessary action to comply with the other directions for the finalisation of the adjudication proceedings pursuant to Ext.P-7.
Petition disposed off.
-
2020 (2) TMI 170 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Filing of annual returns - uploading of annual returns in GSTR 9C Form, which are filed by the assessees for the financial year 2017-18 - apparent technical flaws, glitches and limitations in the online portal system evolved by GSTN - extension of date of filing of returns - HELD THAT:- Infosys Limited and Tech Mahindra Limited have been entrusted the task of evolving and maintaining the GSTN Network for IT support. With a view to better appreciate the intricacies, and to ensure that the grievances raised by the taxpayers – whose interest the petitioner association represents and our orders are understood and implemented in true perspective, we consider it necessary to have Infosys Limited and Tech Mahindra Limited present before us, to receive their assistance, as and when required.
Court Notices to be issued to Infosys Limited and Tech Mahindra Limited in the aforesaid context - Let court notice issue to them returnable on 20.02.2020.
-
2020 (2) TMI 169 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Refund of unutilized CENVAT credit - zero rated supplies - clubbing of successive calendar months/quarters across different financial years - Section 16(1)(a) of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - validity of Circular No.37/11/2018-GST dated 15.03. 2018 and Circular No. 125/44/19-GST dated 18.11.2019 - period from November, 2017 to June, 2018 - HELD THAT:- By way of the impugned circulars, though the respondents recognise the difficulties faced by the exporters and have permitted them to file refund claim for one calendar month/quarter or by clubbing successive calendar months/quarters, yet the restriction pertaining to the spread of refund claim across different financial years is arbitrary. There is no rationale or justification for such a constraint. In the instant case, where exports are not made in the same financial year, question arises as to whether Respondents can restrict the filing of the refund for tax periods spread across two financial years and deprive the petitioner of its valuable right accrued in his favour. In exports, availability of the rotation of funds is essential for the business to thrive. Moreover, businesses do not run according to the whims of the executive authorities. The business world cannot be told when to place orders for exports; when to manufacture the goods for export; and; when to actually undertake the exports. Respondents’ impugned circulars have thus blocked the capital of the petitioner and the unutilised ITC and it has accumulated huge amount of unutilised ITC to the tune of ₹ 30 crores. Merely because the petitioner made exports in the month of June, 2018, we do not see any justification to deny the refund of the ITC which have accumulated in the previous financial years.
The Respondents cannot, artificially by acting contrary to the fundamental spirit and object of the law, contrive ways to deny the benefit, which the substantive provisions of the law confer on the tax payers. Thus, the petitioner has a strong prima facie case, and we cannot deny the petitioner of its right to claim refund which is visible from the mechanism provided under the Act. The impugned circulars take away the vested right of the taxpayer that has accrued in the relevant period.
Respondents are directed to process the petitioner’s claim in accordance with law once the tax refund is filed - petition allowed by way of remand.
-
2020 (2) TMI 168 - PATNA HIGH COURT
Maintainability of petition - alternative remedy of appeal - transitional credit - time limitation - HELD THAT:- The petitioner has an equally efficacious alternative remedy of preferring an appeal under the provisions of Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
The issue of limitation shall not come in the way of the petitioner, if, as mutually agreed upon, the appeal is preferred on or before 18.02.2020.
Petition disposed off.
-
2020 (2) TMI 128 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Provisional release of confiscated goods alongwith conveyance - FORM-GST MOV-10 - HELD THAT:- We are not inclined to interfere at this stage. Ultimately, if a final order of confiscation is passed, the same would be appealable under Section 107 of the Act.
Application disposed off.
-
2020 (2) TMI 98 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, TAMILNADU
Classification of goods - unbranded mixture of flour of pulses and grams i.e. leguminous vegetables and cereal flours - whether fall under the HSN Code 1106 and 1102 respectively? - circular no 80 dt. 31-12-2018 - rate of GST.
HSN Code - Type I (Flour of Grams-80%, Flour of Maize-10% and Flour of rice-10%) - Type II (Flour of Grams-70%, Flour of Peas-10%, Flour of Maize-10% and Flour of Rice-10%) - Type III (Flour of Grams-50%, flour of Peas-20%, Flour of Maize-20% and Flour of Rice-10%) - Type IV (Flour of Peas-70%, Flour of Maize-15% and Flour of Rice-15%) - Type V (Flour of Grams-25%, Flour of Peas-25%, Flour of Maize-25% and Flour of Rice-25%) - HELD THAT:- Classifiable under CTH 11061090.
HSN Code - Type VI (Flour of Rice-95% and Flour of Urad-5%) - HELD THAT:- CTH 11029090.
Applicable rate of tax - products are packed with such a registered Trade Mark in unit containers - Type I, II, III, IV and V (CTH 11061090) - HELD THAT:- 2.5% CGST as per Sl.No. 59 of Schedule I of the Notification No. 1/2017-C.T.(Rate) dated 28.06.2017 as amended and 2.5% SGST as per Sl.No. 59 of Schedule I of Notification Ms. No. II(2)/CTR/532(d-4)/2017 vide G.O. (Ms) No. 62 dated 29.06.2017 as amended.
Applicable rate of tax - products are packed with such a registered Trade Mark in unit containers - Type VI (CTH 11029090) - HELD THAT:- 2.5% CGST as per Sl.No. 55 of Schedule I of the Notification No. 1/2017-C.T.(Rate) dated 28.06.2017 as amended and 2.5% SGST as per Sl.No. 55 of Schedule 1 of Notification Ms. No. II(2)/CTR/532(d-4)/2017, vide G.O. (Ms) No. 62 dated 29.06.2017 as amended.
Applicable rate of tax - If the products are packed without a registered brand name - Type I, II, III, IV and V (CTH 11061090) - HELD THAT:- Nil CGST as per Sl.No. 78 of the Notification No. 2/2017-C.T.(Rate) dated 28.06.2017 as amended and nil SGST as per Sl.No. 78 of Notification No. II(2)/CTR/532(d-5)/2017 vide G.O. (Ms) No. 63 dated 29.06.2017 as amended.
Applicable rate of tax - If the products are packed without a registered brand name - Type VI (CTH 11029090) - HELD THAT:- Nil CGST as per Sl.No. 74 of the Notification No. 2/2017 -C.T. (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 as amended and nil SGST as per Sl.No. 74 of Notification No. II(2)/CTR/532(d-5)/2017 vide G.O (Ms ) No. 63 dated 29.06.2017 as amended.
-
2020 (2) TMI 32 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, TAMILNADU
Classification of goods - Rice Husk Board - whether classified as wood and Articles of Wood under Chapter 44 and attract 12% rate of GST? - HELD THAT:- Fibreboard manufactured by bonding fibres extracted from wood chips or other lingo-cellulose material. They are bonded together by adding thermosetting resins and find application such as furniture, interior decoration and in building are classified under this heading. The product in hand is a ‘Natural Fibre Composite Board’ with density of ranging from 0.65 - 0.8g/Cm3(as given in the brochure) and finds application in furniture, interior decoration, building, etc. In this case as per the manufacturing process, fibres are extracted from the rice husk and then mixed with lime powder (calcium carbonate), processing additives such as lubricants, foaming agents, foam regulators, heat stabilizers, etc. PVC resin is used as a binding agent. Hence, the product is a Fibreboard and is more aptly classifiable under CTH 441193 as ‘Others’ as it is not a Medium Density Fibreboard. Further classification will depend on the individual properties of the product.
NFC Board manufactured by the applicant with main content as Rice husk, will more appropriately be classified under CTH 441193, the applicable rate of GST is taken up for consideration. The rate of CGST is notified vide Notification No. 01/2017-C.T.(Rate) dated 28.06.2017 as amended in respect of goods and that of SGST is notified vide Notification No. vide G.O. (Ms) No. 62 dated 29.06.2017 as amended. As per Sl.No 92 of Schedule-II of the Notifications, specifies the following goods falling under Chapter 44 or any other Chapter are subject to 6% CGST.
Rice Husk Board or fibre board manufactured from agricultural crop residues, irrespective of the Chapter under which the same are classified, are subjected to CGST @ 6% and 6 % SGST.
....
|
