|
Advanced Search Options
GST - High Court - Case Laws
Showing 1 to 20 of 1625 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 (4) TMI 62
Interest on delayed refunds - section 56 of CGST Act - this Court directed the applicants herein to pay simple interest on the delayed payment @ 9% per annum - case of applicant is that the directions could not have been for making payment @ 9% per annum but, in fact, it should have been @ 6% per annum as provided under Section 56 of the CGST Act. HELD THAT:- No case is made out for review of the order passed by this Court dated 10.07.2019. Having regard to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, this Court thought fit to award interest @ 9% per annum. Application dismissed.
- 2020 (4) TMI 61
Confiscation of goods - Section 130 of Punjab Goods and Service Act, 2017 - appealable order or not - HELD THAT:- Considering the fact that the goods now stand released to the Petitioner subject to terms and conditions that have been fulfilled, the Court permits the Petitioner to raise all the points raised in the present writ petition in the statutory appeal to be filed by the Petitioner against the order dated 19th July, 2019. Petition disposed off.
- 2020 (4) TMI 60
Release of Confiscated goods - section 130 of GST Act - appealabe order or not - HELD THAT:- Considering the fact that the goods now stand released to the petitioner subject to terms and conditions, the Court permits the petitioner to raise all the points which were raised in the present writ petition in the statutory appeal to be filed by the petitioner against the order dated 20th July, 2019. Petition disposed off.
- 2020 (4) TMI 59
Release of detained goods alongwith the truck - Section 129 of the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017 - HELD THAT:- The writ applicant availed the benefit of the interm-order passed by this Court and got the vehicle, along with the goods released on payment of the tax amount. The proceedings, as on date, are at the stage of show cause notice, under Section 129 of the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017. The proceedings shall go ahead in accordance with law. It shall be open for the writ applicant to point out the recent pronouncement of this Court in the case of SYNERGY FERTICHEM PVT. LTD VERSUS STATE OF GUJARAT [2019 (12) TMI 1213 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] - It is now for the applicant to make good his case that the show cause notice, issued in GSTMOV- 6, deserves to be discharged. Application disposed off.
- 2020 (4) TMI 58
Time limitation for filing petition - validity of order passed u/s 62 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - HELD THAT:- The writ petition has been filed on 24th February, 2020 - Even if we are to assume that the writ petitioner has approached this Court upon receipt of the impugned order only on December, 2019, the delay of six months, being the date from passing of the impugned order and the date of receipt of the same by the writ petitioner, clearly reflects on the question of bona fides of the writ petitioner. Since the order dated 3rd June, 2019, has already been passed by the concerned respondent authority, we do not consider the facts and circumstances of the case to be of such a nature to invoke our extraordinary discretionary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India - Petition is ....... + More
- 2020 (4) TMI 57
Release of detained goods alongwith the conveyance - section 129(3) of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - petitioner undertakes that the petitioner shall deposit the bank guarantee of the required amount stipulated in the show cause notice dated 20th March, 2018 within three weeks - HELD THAT:- In case such bank guarantee is deposited within three weeks from today, the proceedings taken out under section 129(3) of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 shall stand concluded in view of the provisions of section 129(5) of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Petition disposed off.
- 2020 (4) TMI 56
Waiver of interest - Regularization of the Petitioner’s GSTR-3B for August, 2017 by bringing it in line with GSTR-1 furnished by the Petitioner - The petitioner’s case was not that of furnishing erroneous details in GSTR-3B, but it was a case where the System had crashed - HELD THAT:- The respondents, in an affidavit dated 3.9.2019, had taken a stand that in the interest of smooth functioning of GST, it is desirable and necessary that manual filing is not permitted. However, subsequently the learned senior standing counsel for the respondents had submitted before the court that in the case of the petitioner, while filing GSTR-3B for September, 2019 in October, 2019, the tax amount of August, 2017 may also be added and thereupon the details submitted in electronic GSTR-3B shall be accepted by the portal. The learned senior stan....... + More
- 2020 (4) TMI 35
Detention of Consignment invoices - the driver of the truck by negligence failed to carry the invoices showing the transaction between the petitioner and the 3rd respondent - Section 129 of GST Act - HELD THAT:- This court would not be an appropriate authority to adjudicate the controversy to either of the human error or intentional or willful. It would be the domain of the adjudicating authority - For the time being, the goods detained can be released, subject to the compliance of conditions referred to in Sec.129(1) of the Act and Rule 43 of 2017. In case the petitioner furnishes the bank guarantee along with other charges, as per the provisions of Sec.129, on deposit of the requisite Bank Guarantee, the goods and the vehicle detained are ordered to be released; subject to the outcome of the controversy by adjudicating authority.
- 2020 (4) TMI 34
Interest on delayed refunds - Section 56 of the CGST Act - this Court directed the applicants herein to pay simple interest on the delayed payment @ 9% per annum. This Court also directed the applicants to look into the chart provided by the writ applicants Annexure-D page-30 of the main matter. By this application, the applicants seek review of our order to the limited extent that the directions could not have been for making payment @ 9% per annum but, in fact, it should have been @ 6% per annum as provided under Section 56 of the CGST Act. HELD THAT:- No case is made out for review of the order passed by this Court dated 10.07.2019. Having regard to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, this Court thought fit to award interest @ 9% per annum. Application dismissed.
- 2020 (4) TMI 33
Release of detained goods alongwith the truck - Section 129 of the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017 - HELD THAT:- The writ applicant availed the benefit of the interm-order passed by this Court and got the vehicle, along with the goods released on payment of the tax amount. The proceedings, as on date, are at the stage of show cause notice, under Section 129 of the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017. The proceedings shall go ahead in accordance with law. It shall be open for the writ applicant to point out the recent pronouncement of this Court in the case of SYNERGY FERTICHEM PVT. LTD VERSUS STATE OF GUJARAT [2019 (12) TMI 1213 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] - It is now for the applicant to make good his case that the show cause notice, issued in GSTMOV- 6, deserves to be discharged. Application disposed off.
- 2020 (3) TMI 1205
Application for revocation of the cancellation order - rejected on the ground that, the petitioner is liable to pay interest for the delayed payment - HELD THAT:- Petitioner submits that the petitioner has also paid interest in the meantime. The writ application disposed off directing the petitioner to file a detailed representation before the CT & GST Officer, Barbil Circle, Jajpur- Opp. Party No.3 within a week from today.
- 2020 (3) TMI 1204
Condonation of delay in filing appeal - time limitation - Section 107 of the OGST Act - HELD THAT:- The petitioner filed appeal beyond the limitation of four months and the appellate authority admittedly had no authority to condone the delay in preferring the appeal. When the appeal was dismissed on the ground of delay vide order dated 06.12.2019, the petitioner has filed this writ application along with medical reports in respect of the petitioner to show that he had reason not to approach the appellate authority during the time allowed by the Act. When the Statute is clear about the limitation, this Court, in exercise of the jurisdiction under Article- 226 of the Constitution of India, cannot direct the appellate authority to entertain the appeal. Application disposed off.
- 2020 (3) TMI 1180
Non-reimbursement of differential tax amount - Scope the mutual agreement between the parties - situation post change in tax regime from Value Added Tax (VAT) to Goods and Service Tax (GST) with effect from 01.07.2017 - grievance of the petitioner is that in view of the introduction of the GST, petitioner is required to pay tax which was not envisaged while entering into the agreement - HELD THAT:- The petitioner shall make a comprehensive representation before the appropriate authority within four weeks from today ventilating the grievance. If such a representation is filed, the authority will consider and dispose of the same, in the light of the aforesaid revised guidelines dated 10.12.2018 issued by the Finance Department, Government of Odisha, as expeditiously as possible, preferably by 30.04.2020 - No coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner till 30.04.2020. Petition disposed off.
- 2020 (3) TMI 1179
Provisional attachment of Current Bank Accounts - Jurisdiction to pass order - Section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - time limitation of validity of order passed. Whether the Principal Additional Director General, DGGI and Additional Director General, DGGI are competent to pass orders under Section 83 of the CGST Act, 2017? - HELD THAT:- On a bare perusal of the CGST Act, 2017, it is absolutely clear that Section 3 equates the ‘Principal Commissioner of Central Tax’ as the “Principal Additional Director of Central Tax’ and the “Commissioner of Central Tax’ as the ‘Additional Director General of Central Tax’. One need not quibble with the wording as the meaning is plain and unambiguous. Furthermore, the fresh orders of provisional attachment has been passed by ‘Pri....... + More
- 2020 (3) TMI 1178
Seizure of documents - proceeding under Section 70 of the OGST Act - grievance of the petitioner is that, since the documents called for by the OGST Authority has been seized by the CGST Authority, he is not in a position to supply the documents to the OGST Authority - HELD THAT:- This writ petition is disposed of, directing the petitioner to apply for copies of the Documents required by him before the CGST authority within 15 (fifteen) days from today. If such an application is filed, the copies of the documents sought for shall be supplied within a period of three weeks from the date of his application. Petition disposed off.
- 2020 (3) TMI 1149
Freezing of petitioner's Bank Accounts - It is alleged the bona fide of the petitioner can be ascertained from the very fact that even while its M.D. was in custody, the petitioner have been paying some or the other amount in the account of the respondent towards clearing its tax liability - HELD THAT:- On payment of ₹ 5.5 crores within two days from the date of defreezing of its all accounts, no coercive action be taken against the petitioner till it continue abiding by the undertaking given today. An undertaking be filed in the course of the day. This order shall be without prejudice to rights and contentions of both the parties on merits. Petition disposed off.
- 2020 (3) TMI 1148
CENVAT credit/transitional credit - inputs/input services/capital goods - situation prior to GST regime - denial on the ground that the case of the petitioner does not fall under the category of technical error - HELD THAT:- Similar issue decided in the case of UNION OF INDIA & ORS. VERSUS ADFERT TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD. [2020 (3) TMI 188 - SC ORDER] where it was held that the petitioner is permitted to file or revise their already filed incorrect statutory form TRAN-1 either electronically or manually within a period of 45 days from today. Thus, respondents shall be at liberty to verify the genuineness of the claim of the petitioner. However, the petitioner shall not be denied of their legitimate claim of CENVAT/ITC on the ground of non filing of TRAN-1 by 27/12/2017. As this Court has allowed this writ petition, the respondent shall n....... + More
- 2020 (3) TMI 1125
Release of detained goods - section 129 of GST Act - classification of goods - whether the Officers of Kerala would have a jurisdiction to detain and seize the goods or at the best could have intimated the jurisdictional Officer in Karnataka to initiate proper proceedings against the petitioner in view of the report? - HELD THAT:- It is evident that Section 129 opens with a non obstante clause empowering the Officers to detain and seize the goods, if it found to be in contravention of any of the any of the provisions of the Act and release of the vehicles, as per the conditions, enumerated, therein. In case of a bonafide dispute with regard to the classification between a transitor of the goods and the squad officer, the squad officer may intercept the goods and detain them for the purpose of preparing the relevant papers for effective tr....... + More
- 2020 (3) TMI 1124
Permission for withdrawal of petition - Whether demand raised in the assessment order Ext.P1 is not in accordance with the provisions of Section 62 read with Section 44 of the GST Act? - HELD THAT:- The petitioner seeks the liberty of this court for withdrawal of this writ petition with a liberty to challenge the assessment order in accordance with law. The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn.
- 2020 (3) TMI 1123
Seizure of documents - proceeding under Section 70 of the OGST Act - grievance of the petitioner is that, since the documents called for by the OGST Authority has been seized by the CGST Authority, he is not in a position to supply the documents to the OGST Authority - HELD THAT:- This writ petition is disposed of, directing the petitioner to apply for copies of the Documents required by him before the CGST authority within 15 (fifteen) days from today. If such an application is filed, the copies of the documents sought for shall be supplied within a period of three weeks from the date of his application. Petition disposed off.
........
|
