|
Advanced Search Options
GST - High Court - Case Laws
Showing 1 to 20 of 2539 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.
- 2021 (3) TMI 61 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Refund of IGST - zero-rated supply - Section 54 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 - opportunity of personal hearing not availed - principles of natural justice - HELD THAT:- Taking note that an opportunity of personal hearing was not availed, in the interest of justice, it would be appropriate if the petitioner is afforded an opportunity of personal hearing to substantiate the detailed replies made, as per the acknowledgements at Annexures-F and F1. Accordingly, the orders at Annexures-A and A1 are set aside. Petitioner to be present for availing of opportunity of personal hearing, when such an opportunity is granted while disposing of the application of the petitioner and a common date may be fixed in order to avoid conflicting orders to be passed as the factual matrix is similar and question of consideration is also identical - petition disposed off.
- 2021 (3) TMI 60 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Attachment of the bank accounts - Section 83 of the CGST Act, 2017 - HELD THAT:- The orders of attachment are of February, 2020. One year period will come to an end within next one week. Till this date there has not been any further extension. Even otherwise, the statutory life of an order of attachment of bank account under Section 83 of the CGST Act is one year unless the authority deems fit to extend it further. Let NOTICE be issued to the respondents returnable on 01.03.2021.
- 2021 (3) TMI 59 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Release of detained goods - validity of the E-Way Bill expired - It is the case of the petitioners that owing to the farmers protest around Delhi, the validity of the E-Way Bill issued on 27th November, 2020 and whereunder the goods were being transported, expired - HELD THAT:- We, in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot be drawn into these factual controversies and are not satisfied that the appellant, owing to the aforesaid, is deprived of the remedy of appeal. The petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to prefer the appellate remedy before the Additional Commissioner and which if preferred shall be decided in accordance with law and it will be open to the petitioners to take all the aforesaid pleas also in the appeal and the Additional Commissioner shall return a finding on merits thereon.
- 2021 (3) TMI 58 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Input tax credit - transitional credit - entering the details in wrong column of GST-Tran-1 form - primary stand taken by the respondents is that the petitioner was specifically given time till 27.12.2017 to set right any mistake that might have been committed by them - HELD THAT:- As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the writ petitioner, the factual matrix obtaining in TARA EXPORTS VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA, GOODS AND SERVICE TAX COUNCIL, THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF CGST AND CENTRAL EXCISE, THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY/COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST) , THE CENTRAL GST OFFICER AND THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, CGST AND CENTRAL EXCISE [2018 (9) TMI 1474 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] is quite different from the case on hand. In Tara Exports, the dealer had not even filed TRAN-1 in time. After missing the bus....... + More
- 2021 (3) TMI 14 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Seeking direction to the respondents to extend the periodicity of filing of annual returns in the State of Maharashtra in COVID-19 pandemic situation - section 44 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 read with Rule 80 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 - HELD THAT:- It is not that the time-limit has not been extended. The initial due date of 31.12.2020 has been extended to 28.02.2021. That apart, on going through the relevant provisions of the CGST Act, more particularly the provision of section 47(2) thereof, we do not find that non-extension of the time-limit beyond 28.02.2021 would lead to any extinguishment of right - It is found from the written instructions dated 25.02.2021 that vide notification No.77 of 2020 - Central Tax dated 15.10.2020 filing of annual return in the prescribed form for businesses with ....... + More
- 2021 (2) TMI 1160 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 - impugned show cause notice for the same period has been issued, demanding further amounts from the petitioner towards CGST - It is the contention of petitioner that under Section 129(1) of the Finance Act, 2019, after the issuance of discharge certificate, such notice could not have been issued - HELD THAT:- Issue notice. List on 15th March, 2021.
- 2021 (2) TMI 1159 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Erroneous impleadment of Authority under the Central Goods and Services Tax as respondent, instead of the State Authority - HELD THAT:- Issue notice. List on 25th March, 2021.
- 2021 (2) TMI 1156 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Maintainability of application - final order of confiscation in Form GST-MOV 11 has already been passed - HELD THAT:- It needs to be noted that the writ applicant herein is a purchaser of the goods in question. The MOV-11 order has been passed against the seller. According to Mr. Kathiriya, the learned AGP, the whereabouts of the seller are not known to the Department. In such circumstances, the only remedy now available for the writ applicant is to recover the amount paid, if any, to the seller in accordance with law - Application disposed off.
- 2021 (2) TMI 1125 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Arrest under section 69 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - offence of availing ineligible Input Tax Credit - out of the alleged availing of ineligible Input Tax Credit of slightly more than ₹ 9 crores, petitioner No.1 has deposited ₹ 4.80 crores which is more than 50% of the alleged dues - HELD THAT:- It is directed that no coercive action shall be taken against petitioner Nos. 2 to 8 till the next date. However, petitioner Nos.2, 7 and 8 shall appear before the investigating authority as summoned on 26.02.2021 at 11:00 a.m. and thereafter as and when summoned. Rest of the petitioners shall appear before the investigating authority as and when summoned and co-operate with the investigation. Stand over to 16.03.2021 for filing of reply and rejoinder.
- 2021 (2) TMI 1124 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Notice/summons issued by the Central Tax Authority whereas adjudication u/s 74 had been made by the State Authority - contention is that once the Central Tax Authority had initiated action, the proceeding was required to be brought to its logical end by the same authority - HELD THAT:- It appears from the perusal of the order dated 8th September, 2020 that the show cause notice had been served under Section 74(2) of the Act and the date was fixed for submitting explanation/objections by the petitioner. The order impugned dated 8th September, 2020 records that the petitioner did not appear before the proper Officer - As the proceedings for determination and levy of tax and penalty had been initiated by the State Tax Authority, this Court does not find substance in the challenge to the jurisdiction of respondent no. 2 to pass order for dete....... + More
- 2021 (2) TMI 1121 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Profiteering - Section 171 of the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017 (CGST Act) and Rules contained in Chapter XV of the central Goods and Services Rules, 2017 - HELD THAT:- Issue notice. Notice is accepted by the counsel for the respondents - Subject to the petitioner paying the entire demanded amount, less the GST amount already deposited, in six equal monthly instalments commencing from the month of February, 2021, there shall be stay of recovery.
- 2021 (2) TMI 1120 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Refund sought of on amount deposited - petitioner was compelled to deposit amount with the respondents and though the said amount was deposited as far back as on 1st July, 2020 and 31st August, 2020 but the respondents are merely retaining the said amount and have not taken any further action - Provisional attachment of Bank Account of petitioner - Section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017 - HELD THAT:- It appears that the respondents were required to issue notices under Sections 73 and/or 74 of the Act to the petitioner and which the respondents have not done till now. It prima facie appears that the respondents, taking advantage of the petitioner having been so compelled to make the deposit, albeit without prejudice to its rights and contentions, are not in a hurry. Thus, unless the respondents issue notice, with....... + More
- 2021 (2) TMI 1119 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Cancellation of registration of selling dealer - submission of petitioner is that at the time of purchase of goods/stocks, the registration of the selling dealer was valid - HELD THAT:- Matter requires consideration. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that 10% of the disputed tax liability has been deposited in terms of Section-107(6) of the Act, the appeal before the Tribunal (when constituted) would be maintainable upon deposit of 20% of the remaining tax amount. The petitioner is willing to deposit that amount - Learned Standing Counsel has accepted notice on behalf of State-respondents. He prays for and is granted four weeks' time to file counter affidavit. Petitioner shall have two weeks thereafter to file rejoinder affidavit. List thereafter.
- 2021 (2) TMI 1117 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Provisional attachment of Bank Accounts - Section 83 of the CGST Act - petitioner submits that the attachment of the bank accounts has brought the entire functioning of the company to a standstill, as the Petitioner is unable to dispense salary to approximately 15000 employees and discharge statutory dues like EPF, ESIC and labour welfare schemes etc. - HELD THAT:- Issue notice. Mr. Satish Aggarwala, SPP accepts notice on behalf of respondents and submits that he would like to take instruction and file short affidavit/ status report within one day. List on 24th February, 2021.
- 2021 (2) TMI 1097 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT
Interest for delay in payment of G.S.T. - validity of adjudication orders - HELD THAT:- Learned counsel for the State and the CGST Council are required to seek specific instruction s on this issue and make their stand clear by the next date. Let these cases appear on 14th January 2021.
- 2021 (2) TMI 1048 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Seeking grant of Bail - GST Evasion - supplier's firms of plastic scrap not found in existence - offence under section 132 (1)(c) and 132(1)((i) of the C.G.S.T. Act, 2017 - harsh and unreasonable conditions imposed for granting bail - HELD THAT:- This Court is of the view that conditions for grant of bail ought not to be so strict as to be incapable of compliance, thereby making a grant of bail illusory. The conditions while granting bail should be reasonable, so that it may not frustrate the very object of granting bail. Discretion exercised by the Court while imposing conditions should not be arbitrary, but it should be keeping in mind to strike balance between the accused and prosecution. In the present case, it is admitted facts to the counsel for the parties that as on date out of disputed amount of ₹ 9,51,00,000/-, the app....... + More
- 2021 (2) TMI 1045 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Seeking grant of bail - Input tax credit - bogus firms - offence under Sections 132(1)(c) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - HELD THAT:- This bail application is allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of ₹ 1,00,000/- together with two sureties in the sum of ₹ 50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court and any Court to which the matter be transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. Bail application allowed.
- 2021 (2) TMI 1043 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Seeking direction for opening of the GST portal to enable them to file the statutory Form necessary for migrating the eligible input tax credit under the GST regime - HELD THAT:- Although filing with the office of Commissioner/ VATO, Ward-71, Delhi was not in accordance with the procedure under the CGST Act, 2017 and perhaps the abovementioned officer was not competent to receive the TRAN-1 Form, but, notwithstanding the mistake, there is another hurdle that the Petitioner must cross i.e., the delay on the part of the Petitioner in approaching this Court. However, considering the fact that in a batch of petitions, this Court has examined similar issues and the same are pending decision, at this stage we consider it appropriate to issue notice to the Respondents, leaving all contentions open. Issue notice to the other Respondents by all modes, returnable on 5th July, 2021.
- 2021 (2) TMI 1042 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT
Works Contract - Manner of payment of relevant tax for the period for which the work is continued - AVAT Act, 2005 or AGST Act, 2017? - HELD THAT:- Instead of issuing notice, public interest would be better served, if a direction is issued to the Commissioner of Tax, Assam to take a decision on the aspect as to for the work period after the advent of the GST regime, which of the tax regimes would be applicable i.e. whether the AVAT Act, 2005 or the AGST Act, 2017. As the matter involves public interest, it is directed that the Commissioner of Tax to take a final decision on the aforesaid aspect within a period of one month from today.
- 2021 (2) TMI 1041 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT
Seeking direction to allow acceptance of Form GST TRAN-I as it could not be submitted in time on GSTN portal - transitional credit - HELD THAT:- Learned counsel for the GSTN, Mr. Amit Kumar and State, Mr. Piyush Chitresh are allowed 4 weeks' time to file counter affidavit positively. The affidavit of GSTN shall, in particular, give the details of the log of the petitioner upto 27th December, 2017 to show whether petitioner had made an attempt to submit Form GST TRAN-I or not besides answering the plea relating to technical glitches. Petitioner may file reply, if so advised, within one week thereafter. Matter be listed after 5 weeks.
........
|
