|
Advanced Search Options
GST - High Court - Case Laws
Showing 1 to 20 of 1791 Records
More information of case laws are visible to the Subscriber of a package i.e:-
Party Name, Court Name, Date of Decision, Full Text of Headnote & Decision etc.
- 2020 (7) TMI 105 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Credit of CGST sanctioned previously - final refund of balance amount - HELD THAT:- They pray for and are permitted to obtain instructions on or before the next date of hearing. List the matter on 10th July, 2020.
- 2020 (7) TMI 104 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Refund of excess amount - transitional credit - HELD THAT:- The respondent vide order dated 24.06.2020 has now categorically accepted that there was excess amount, which is liable to be refunded to the petitioner. The petitioner had also adjusted the same from transitional credit availed by the petitioner towards its tax liability - the question of payment of interest by the petitioner under Section 50 of the said Act, does not arise as the said amount is sought to be refunded. The writ petition is therefore liable to be closed in the light of the subsequent order dated 24.06.2020 of the respondent. Petition disposed off.
- 2020 (7) TMI 77 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Time Limit for filing of TRAN-1 form - vires of Rule l17 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 - unable to file form due to technical glitches in the portal - HELD THAT:- Issue notice - To await the judgment of the Supreme Court in Union of India Vs. Brand Equity Treaties Limited & Ors., [2020 (6) TMI 517 - SC ORDER].
- 2020 (7) TMI 76 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Reopening of portal for filing of Form GST TRAN-1 - transitional credit - HELD THAT:- Considering the fact that the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the writ petition before 30.06.2020 - which has been listed on 30.06.2020, in case the Special Leave Petition - preferred by the respondents before the Supreme Court against the decision in Brand Equity Treaties Limited (supra) is rejected, and our decision is upheld, it goes without saying that this Court would not be powerless to direct the respondents to accept the GST Tran-I Form of the petitioner at a later point of time. List on 16.09.2020 along with other similar matters.
- 2020 (7) TMI 75 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Reopening of GST portal for filing of GST Tran-I Form - transitional credit - submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the decision of this Court in BRAND EQUITY TREATIES LIMITED, MICROMAX INFORMATICS LTD., DEVELOPER GROUP INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, RELIANCE ELEKTRIK WORKS VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. [2020 (5) TMI 171 - DELHI HIGH COURT], is pending consideration before the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court has stayed the said decision - HELD THAT:- While issuing notice to the respondents, we adjourn the matter to 16.09.2020 - when, we are informed, other similar petitions are coming up before the Court.
- 2020 (7) TMI 74 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Requirement of Bank Guarantee for release of confiscated goods - HELD THAT:- Admittedly the petitioner claims himself to be only the owner of the vehicle as a transporter and has shown his disclaimer on the goods. In view thereof, the revenue department would be free to auction the goods in terms of the Rules. However, if the petitioner submits the bank guarantee in terms of Rule 140, relating to the valuation of the vehicle, the revenue department would, upon satisfaction, release the vehicle to the petitioner. As owners of the goods are not presently before this court, no order in this regard is required to be passed. Petition disposed off.
- 2020 (7) TMI 26 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Wrongful availment of ITC - Section 67 of CGST Act - HELD THAT:- Keeping in view the serious allegations that have been levelled against the petitioner by the officers of DGGI as well as by the Commissioner of CGST, Delhi (East), this Court is of the view that ends of justice would be met if the DGGI is directed to conclude the investigation in the present case within a period of three months. The present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to DGGI to conclude the investigation within three months.
- 2020 (7) TMI 24 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Bogus billing transactions without any physical movement of the goods - Vires of Rule 142(1)(a) of CGST/GGST Rules - validity of SCN issued by the respondent No.1 under Section 122(1) of CGST Act - HELD THAT:- Section 164 of the Act which provides for the power to make rules. It may be noted that Section 164 of the Act confers power on the Central Government to frame the rules. Under Section 164 of the Act, the Central Government has the power to make rules generally to carry out all or any of the purposes of the Act. Rule 142(1)(a) of the Rules, 2017 is valid and is no manner conflict with any of the provisions of the Act. The challenge to the legality and validity of the show cause should fail having regard to the scope of judicial review and the challenge to the validity of Rule 142(1)(a) of the Rules should also fail - Application dismissed.
- 2020 (7) TMI 23 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Filing of form TRAN-I - availment of credit of excess VAT reflected in Returns - vires of Rule 117(1A) of Central GST Rules, 2017 - HELD THAT:- The Petitioner has challenged vires of Rule 117 (1A) of Rules, however we do not think it appropriate to declare it invalid as we are of the considered opinion that Petitioner is entitled to carry forward Cenvat Credit accrued under Central Excise Act, 1944. The Respondents have repeatedly extended date to file TRAN-I where there was technical glitch as per their understanding. Repeated extensions of last date to file TRAN-I in case of technical glitches as understood by Respondent vindicate claim of the Petitioner that denial of unutilized credit to those dealers who are unable to furnish evidence of attempt to upload TRAN-I would amount to violation of Article 14 as well Article 300A of the Cons....... + More
- 2020 (7) TMI 22 - TRIPURA HIGH COURT
Seizure of goods alongwith vehicle - amendment in the e-way bill could not be immediately done for the lockdown - HELD THAT:- Since we have already issued the notice for examining the challenge as raised by the petitioner, it would be appropriate for fair ends of justice that the respondents shall release the goods and the vehicle, if the petitioner furnished the indemnity bond undertaking clearly that in the event of any adverse order from this court or on issuance of direction to make tax and penalty as imposed by the Superintendent of State Tax (GST), Churaibari Enforcement Wing, the petitioner shall, within seven days, pay the entire amount to the competent authority without raising any further plea. The said indemnity bond be made in favour of the Superintendent of State Tax (GST) Churaibari Enforcement Wing. If the Superintendent of....... + More
- 2020 (6) TMI 702 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Permission to withdraw appeal - appealable order or not - HELD THAT:- It is admitted that the order dated 31.08.2018 is the subject matter of challenge in Writ Tax No.1298 of 2018, which is pending consideration. There are no reason to entertain the writ petition, challenging the consequential order. The present petition is dismissed as withdrawn.
- 2020 (6) TMI 677 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Grant of Anticipatory Bail - evasion of tax - HELD THAT:- Taking into consideration the gravity of accusation, there being no criminal antecedents of the applicant and there being no possibility of his fleeing from justice, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case - In the event of arrest of the applicant Shahzad Alam involved in the aforesaid case shall be released on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report if any under section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. before the competent Court on his furnishing a personal bond of ₹ 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned, with conditions imposed.
- 2020 (6) TMI 658 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Carry forward of Transitional credit - credit of eligible dues in respect of stock available with the petitioner as on appointed day - vires of Rules l17 and 120A of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 as ultra vires Sections 140 and 174 of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - HELD THAT:- List on 16th September, 2020.
- 2020 (6) TMI 657 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Carry forward of Transitional credit - credit of eligible dues in respect of stock available with the petitioner as on appointed day - vires of Rules l17 and 120A of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 as ultra vires Sections 140 and 174 of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - HELD THAT:- List on 16th September, 2020.
- 2020 (6) TMI 656 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Carry forward of Transitional credit - credit of eligible dues in respect of stock available with the petitioner as on appointed day - vires of Rules l17 and 120A of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 as ultra vires Sections 140 and 174 of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - HELD THAT:- List on 16th September, 2020.
- 2020 (6) TMI 655 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Carry forward of Transitional credit - credit of eligible dues in respect of stock available with the petitioner as on appointed day - vires of Rules l17 and 120A of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 as ultra vires Sections 140 and 174 of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - HELD THAT:- List on 16th September, 2020.
- 2020 (6) TMI 654 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Carry forward of Transitional credit - credit of eligible dues in respect of stock available with the petitioner as on appointed day - vires of Rules l17 and 120A of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 as ultra vires Sections 140 and 174 of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - HELD THAT:- To await the judgment of the Supreme Court in UNION OF INDIA VERSUS BRAND EQUITY TREATIES LIMITED AND ORS. ETC. ETC. [2020 (6) TMI 517 - SC ORDER].
- 2020 (6) TMI 640 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Filing of Form GST TRAN-1 - interim order - HELD THAT:- The respondent no.3 shall reopen the portal within two weeks from today. In the event they do not do so, they will entertain the GST TRAN-1 of the petitioner manually and pass orders on it after due verification of the credits as claimed by the petitioner. They will also ensure that the petitioner is allowed to pay its taxes on the regular electronic system also which is being maintained for use of the credit likely to be considered for the petitioner. List this matter after six weeks.
- 2020 (6) TMI 626 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Validity of order passed by the National Anti-Profiteering Authority - profiteering on the sale of its “food processor” product - HELD THAT:- Issue notice to unserved respondent No.4 by all modes including dasti. Petitioner is directed to deposit ₹ 4,53,949/- with Central and State Consumer Welfare Boards within three months - The interest amount as well as penalty and further investigation with regard to other impacted products as well as the letter dated 11th June, 2020 issued by the Director General of Anti Profiteering are stayed till further orders. List the matter on 07th September, 2020.
- 2020 (6) TMI 625 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Vires of Rule 117 (4) of the CGST/SGST Rules, 2017 - violation of of Articles 14, 19(1) (g) and 265 of the Constitution of India - principles of natural justice - transitional credit of inputs held in stock - opportunity to file the declaration in CGST TRAN -2 - HELD THAT:- Transitory provisions, as the word indicates have to be given its due meaning. Transition from pre-GST Regime to GST Regime has not been smooth and therefore, what was reasonable in ideal circumstances is not in the current situation. In absence of any specific provisions under the Act, we would have to hold that in terms of the residuary provisions of the Limitation Act, the period of three years should be the guiding principle and thus a period of three years from the appointed date would be the maximum period for availing of such credit. The petitioner has attempted....... + More
........
|
