|
Advanced Search Options
GST - Case Laws
Showing 81 to 100 of 183 Records
-
2019 (11) TMI 894 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Refund of allegedly wrongfully availing Input Tax Credit paid, under protest - Validity of provisions in section 16(2)(c) and section 42 in Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 - HELD THAT:- Petitioners do not have a case. Investigation is ongoing. No demand has yet been raised, the payment having been made voluntarily. In an earlier writ petition, filed by petitioners, there was direction for the investigation to proceed. Petitioners have not challenged such order. Mr. Kar responds, the challenge here was not urged in his clients’ earlier writ petition.
No express interim order is necessary in view of submissions recorded above and in earlier order dated 20th September, 2019.
List on 10th January, 2020.
-
2019 (11) TMI 893 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Filing of TRANS-1 - unable to avail Transitional credit - CGST Act - HELD THAT:- The Respondents are obliged to open GSTN Portal in view of the decisions of the various Courts on identical facts
Mr. Adik, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents very fairly on instructions, states that, Respondent No.1 would pass an appropriate order on the Petitioner’s application dated 4th June, 2019, within a period of three weeks from today, after hearing the Petitioner - petition disposed off.
-
2019 (11) TMI 892 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Confiscation of goods alongwith the vehicle - respondents have proceeded under section 130 of the CGST Act, 2017 by issuing notice in Form GST-MOV-10 on the ground that after checking the dealers record according to the GST system, the dealer appears to be involved in bogus billing practice or making false claim of ITC for the period of August, 2019 and September, 2019 - HELD THAT:- Issue notice, returnable on 18th November, 2019.
-
2019 (11) TMI 891 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Refund of IGST/ITC - case of petitioner is that refund of IGST has to be processed by the Jurisdictional Officer of Customs in respect of exports undertaken by the exporters - Rules 96 and 96A of the CGST Rules - HELD THAT:- The Respondents are directed to examine the said claim of the Petitioner and if the same or any part whereof is found to be payable, to release the refund amount within four weeks positively. However, in case the Respondents decided to contest this petition, they should file their counter affidavit within six weeks to which rejoinder may be filed before the next date.
List on 04.05.2020.
-
2019 (11) TMI 890 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Rectification of return - Extension of time limit for filing the annual return - HELD THAT:- Considering the fact that the respondents have not filed a reply despite grant of opportunity as early as on 16.09.2019, and the period for filing the annual return for the period in question would expire on 30.11.2019, we are inclined to grant interim relief as sought by the petitioner verbally.
Therefore, subject to final outcome of the writ petition, we permit the petitioner to rectify the return in GSTR 1 Form for the period November, 2017 in respect of the six recipients noted in the tabulation hereinabove, by correcting their GSTIN Nos. The rectified Form shall be submitted by the petitioner within a week manually.
List on 08.05.2020.
-
2019 (11) TMI 889 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Migration of GST registration - the petitioner did not choose to migrate to the regular registration within the time granted under the Statute. The migration did not happen even thereafter within the two subsequent periods of extension - CGST Rules, 2017 - HELD THAT:- The request of the petitioner cannot be entertained, since the petitioner did not avail of the many opportunities granted by the respondents for migrating to the GST registration - The inaction on the part of the petitioner cannot be condoned, and hence, taking note of the averments in the statement filed on behalf of respondents 1 and 2, the prayer sought for in the writ petition cannot be granted.
Petition dismissed.
-
2019 (11) TMI 888 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Rate of GST for the restaurant sector - input tax credit - Validity of Notification dated 14th November, 2017 - option to pay 18% GST with full ITC has been removed for the restaurant sector - HELD THAT:- Issue notice, returnable on 11th December 2019. In the meanwhile, the respondent shall consider and report to this court as to what amount can be taken to secure to the petitioners the option to discharge GST either at the rate of 18% with full input tax credit or at the rate of 5% without input tax credit.
-
2019 (11) TMI 887 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Validity of detention order - detention on the ground that at the time of detention of the vehicle, the original invoice was not produced by the driver of the vehicle - Rule 138A of the SGST Rules - HELD THAT:- The absence of an invoice can be a valid ground for detention under Section 129 of the GST Act. Accordingly, I find that the detention in Ext.P4 order is justified.
It is directed that if the petitioner furnishes the bank guarantee for the tax and penalty amount determined in Ext.P4, then the respondent shall release the consignment and the vehicle to the petitioner, and thereafter proceed for adjudication in terms of Section 138 of GST Act, after hearing the petitioner.
Petition disposed off.
-
2019 (11) TMI 886 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Detention of goods alongwith vehicle - detention was on the ground that the validity period of the e-way bill that accompanied the transportation had already expired at the time of detention - Section 129 of the GST Act - HELD THAT:- It is directed that if the petitioner furnishes a bank guarantee for the tax and penalty amount quantified in Ext.P3B order, then the respondents shall release the consignment and the vehicle to the petitioner - The respondents shall, thereafter, proceed to adjudicate the issue after notice to the petitioner and in accordance with the procedure prescribed under Section 130 of the GST Act.
-
2019 (11) TMI 885 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Levy of IGST on freight - entry 10 in Notification no. 10/2017-Integrated Tax (Rate) and entry 9(ii) in Notification no. 8/2017-Integrated Tax (Rate), both dated 28th June, 2017 - HELD THAT:- Mr. Banerjee, learned advocate appearing on behalf of revenue does not dispute his client’s position on similar challenges, of having had chosen to accept the interim order and proceed for adjudication on merits.
In view of above this is a fit case for issuance of similar interim order. No coercive action shall be taken against petitioners.
List on 13th December, 2019.
-
2019 (11) TMI 884 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Delay in uploading GST TRAN-I and certain form GST TRAN-II - delay occurred due to technical glitch - HELD THAT:- The Nodal Officer has to take a decision, whether failure in uploading attributable to the technical glitch or not.
Review petition disposed off.
-
2019 (11) TMI 883 - UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT
Release of goods alongwith the vehicle - detention on the ground that the truck had reached the check post in Uttarakhand after expiry of the time stipulated in the E-way bill - section 129 of CGST Act - HELD THAT:- Since it is admitted that the 2017 Act provides for release of goods only on furnishing a bank guarantee, it would be wholly inappropriate for us to issue any direction contrary thereto - there are no reason, therefore, to accede to the appellant-writ petitioner’s request for release of the vehicle and the goods on merely furnishing an indemnity bond.
Appeal dismissed.
-
2019 (11) TMI 882 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
,Maintainability of appeal - Appealable order u/s 112 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, however, no Appellate Tribunal is functioning in the State of U.P. - HELD THAT:- Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is ready to deposit the amount of tax, interest, fine fee and penalty, as per the impugned order and as required under the provisions of Section 112 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, which is a pre-condition for filing the appeal. He prays for fifteen days' time to comply the terms and conditions - Prayer made is allowed.
List immediately after fifteen days.
-
2019 (11) TMI 881 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT
Filing of GST TRAN -1 - unable to claim transitional input credit - transition to GST regime - HELD THAT:- The present petition is disposed of with direction to the respondents to re-open web portals enabling the petitioner to upload its Form GST TRAN-1 electronically or allow the petitioner to file GST TRAN -1 return manually.
-
2019 (11) TMI 880 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Waiver of the bar of alternative remedy - detention of goods alongwith vehicle - it was alleged that neither there was any genuine transport agency nor there was any genuine buyer disclosed in the documents found accompanying the goods - HELD THAT:- While the writ petition is being provisionally entertained because of non constitution of Tribunal, insofar as interim relief is concerned, it is provided that the order of confiscation of the truck, shall remain in abeyance, subject to the petitioner depositing with the respondent no.3, an amount equal to tax on the goods found loaded on the truck within two weeks from today.
List on 16.10.2019 alongiwth Writ Tax No. 942 of 2018.
-
2019 (11) TMI 879 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT
Grant of anticipatory bail - alleged availment of input tax credit on the basis of forged invoice - Section 132 of the Jharkhand GST Act, 2017 - alleged offence of Smt. Renu Singh - HELD THAT:- The petitioner of A.B.A. No.6521 of 2018 namely Smt. Renu Singh is directed to surrender in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bokaro within four weeks from today and in the event of her arrest or surrendering, she will be enlarged on bail provisionally for a period of one month from the date of her surrender on showing proof of reversing input tax credit of ₹ 50,00,000/- with the Goods and Service Tax Department after the date of this order and on furnishing bail bond of ₹ 25,000/- (Twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bokaro in connection with Bokaro Steel City P.S. Case No.121 of 2018 corresponding to G.R. No.663 of 2018 with the condition that she will co-operate with the investigation of the case and appear before the investigating officer as and when noticed by him and furnish her mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an undertaking that she will not change her mobile number during the pendency of the case and subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Petitioner of A.B.A. No.4745 of 2018 namely Nikit Mittal - HELD THAT:- The petitioner of A.B.A. No.4745 of 2018 namely Nikit Mittal is directed to surrender in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bokaro within one month from today and in the event of his arrest or surrendering, he will be enlarged on bail on showing proof of reversing input tax credit of ₹ 1,06,282/- to the Goods and Service Tax Department after the date of this order and on furnishing bail bond of ₹ 25,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bokaro in connection with Bokaro Steel City P.S. Case No.121 of 2018 corresponding to G.R. No.663 of 2018 with the condition that he will cooperate with the investigation of the case and appear before the investigating officer as and when noticed by him and furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the pendency of the case and subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
-
2019 (11) TMI 822 - UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT
Imposition of tax and penalty - it is alleged that the truck had reached the check post in Uttarakhand, after the expiry of the time stated in the E-way bill - Section 129 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - HELD THAT:- The writ petition is wholly premature. Petitioner must give a reply of the show cause notice to the concerned authority explaining the valid reasons as to why delay has been caused and since under sub-section (1) of Section 129 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, goods can be released inter alia on petitioner’s furnishing a security equivalent to the amount payable, in case, the petitioner deposits the security, the same shall be considered in accordance with law.
Petition disposed off.
-
2019 (11) TMI 821 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Release of detained goods alongwith vehicle - case of Revenue is that the respondents have no objection if the petition is disposed of as not pressed - HELD THAT:- The petition is disposed of as not pressed by clarifying that, it shall be open for the respondent authorities to take appropriate action in connection with the goods seized by them on 31.07.2019, since the owner of the goods has not come forward for release of the goods.
-
2019 (11) TMI 820 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Direction to the respondents to accept its GST TRAN-1 form offline or by opening portal - CGST Rules, 2017 - HELD THAT:- Section 140 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 confers a right to a registered dealer to take credit of ‘eligible duties’ of the amount lying unutilized on the day immediately preceding the appointed day, in the manner prescribed. First proviso to sub-section (8) of Section 140 postulates that such credit will be admissible subject to a condition that the registered person furnishes his return for the period ending with the day immediately preceding the appointed day within three months of the appointed day. Rule 117(1) of the Rules of 2017 mandates that every registered person entitled to take credit of input tax under Section 140 of the Act will be required to file a declaration electronically in Form GST TRAN-1, within ninety days of the appointed day, specifying therein, the amount of input credit to which he is entitled.
Notification dated 10.9.2018 a new proviso sub-rule (1A) was introduced, while the provision contained in sub-rule (1) remained unaltered. A careful reading of sub-rule (1A) shows that it is not an extension of time of furnishing return or GST TRAN-1; it is rather an enabling provision providing further opportunity to the registered person who could not submit the said declaration by the due date on account of technical difficulties on the common portal.
The present writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the respondents to permit the petitioner to submit offline GST TRAN-1 form, subject to furnishing a proof that he had tried to upload GST TRAN-1 form prior to 27.12.2017 and such attempt failed due to technical fault/glitch on the common portal.
-
2019 (11) TMI 819 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Refund of IGST paid - export of goods - additional tax paid due to variation of rates - petitioner claimed refund of ₹ 94,42,39,026/- along with the additional tax paid due to variation of rates in London Metal Exchange - respondents have refunded ₹ 94,42,39,026/-. But they are not in a position to refund the balance amount of ₹ 2,02,94,956/- as the entire process is system managed - Circular No.40 of 2018-Customs F.No.450/119/2017-Cus-IV, dated 24.10.2018 - HELD THAT:- The present case on hand is also similar to that of the problem which was faced by the respondents in similar circumstances. When there is no provision in the electronically managed system, they should have visualised the situation prior to its introduction to do away with these anomalies and provided solution to the same.
When the issue of refund like the present one was dealt with by the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in M/S AMIT COTTON INDUSTRIES THROUGH PARTNER, VELJIBHAI VIRJIBHAI RANIPA VERSUS PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS [2019 (7) TMI 472 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT], the High Court has given a direction to the respondents to refund the IGST paid in regard to the goods exported i.e., 'Zero rated Supplies', with 7% Simple Interest in view of circular dated 09.10.2018 and Rule 96 of Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017.
When the process is completely system managed, the respondents are supposed to visualise the complications and provide solutions to do away with the anomalies. The very object of encouraging exporters and augmenting the foreign currency will be defeated by such hiccups. Therefore, considering the judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat as well as the circular issued by the fourth respondent dated 24.10.2018, a direction is given to the respondents to refund the additional IGST paid by the petitioner to the tune of ₹ 2,02,94,956/- within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Petition disposed off.
........
|
