Home Case Index All Cases GST HC GST - HC This

Law	-- All -- GST Income Tax Benami Property/ Transactions Customs Corporate Laws Securities / SEBI Insolvency & Bankruptcy FEMA PMLA Service Tax Central Excise CST, VAT & Sales Tax Wealth tax Indian Laws
Court	-- Any -- Supreme Court SC Orders / Highlights High Court Appellate Tribunal Tribunal Appellate authority for Advance Ruling Advance Ruling Authority ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY Commission Central Government Board DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court Commissioner / Appellate Authority Other
Citation	--Year-- 2022 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 1990 1989 1988 1987 1986 1985 1984 1983 1982 1981 1980 1979 1978 1977 1976 1975 1974 1973 1972 1971 1970 1969 1968 1967 1966 1965 1964 1963 1962 1961 1960 1959 1958 1957 1956 1955 1954 1953 1952 1951 1950 Upto 1949 - -Volume- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Landmark	Nil - N/A Referred in >= 3 Cases Referred in >= 4 Cases Referred in >= 5 Cases Referred in >= 10 Cases Referred in >= 15 Cases Referred in >= 25 Cases Referred in >= 50 Cases Referred in >= 100 Cases
Order by	TMI Citation Date of Decision

Advanced Search Options

GST - High Court - Case Laws

Showing 1 to 20 of 4432 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 and Decision etc.

• 2022 (9) TMI 1387
  
  Constitutional Validity of Clause (A)(b) of the Notification No.04/2022-Central Tax (Rate) dated 13th July, 2022 - renting of residential accommodation - exemption available to tenants who are registered under GST or not - HELD THAT:- The clarification that renting of a residential dwelling by a proprietor of a registered proprietorship firm, who rents it in his/her own personal capacity for use as his/her own residence as well as not for use in the course or furtherance of business of his/her proprietorship firm and such renting is on his/her own account and not that of proprietorship firm shall be exempt from GST, is accepted by this Court and all the respondents are held bound by the same. Petition disposed off.

  ---

• 2022 (9) TMI 1386
  
  Rejection of refund claim - zero rated supply - whether the petitioner has supplied Electrical Energy across the border? - entitlement for refund of Input Tax Credit - whether amended Rule 89(2) of CGST Rules, 2022 is clarificatory or declaratory? - HELD THAT:- Circular No.175/07/2022-GST dated 06.07.2022 issued by Ministry of Finance, Government of India clearly establishes that amendment to Rule 89 of CGST (Amendment) Rules, 2022 was carried out to cure the defect in Rule 89 of CGST Rules, 2017, because of the problem faced by power generating units in filing refund claims of unutilised Input Tax Credit on export of electricity. Further, a perusal of the amendment to Rule 89(2) of CGST Rules, would inter-alia show that the said Rule came to be amended only to clarify the anomaly that was existing with regard to production of material ev....... + More

  ---

• 2022 (9) TMI 1385
  
  Reopening of portal for filing of form TRAN-1 - carry forward of CENVAT Credit - Section 140(3) of the CGST Act, 2017 - violation of principles of natural justice - HELD THAT:- It is very clear that the assesses are given two months’ time for filing concerned forms for availing Transitional Credit through TRAN-1 and TRAN-2 i.e, w.e.f. 01.09.2022 to 31.10.2022. Further, the authorities were also directed to see that there would be no technical glitches during the said period. A reading of the said order does not anywhere indicate that the same pertains to a particular assessment year. It appears that any assessee, who intends to file concerned forms for availing Transitional Credit through TRAN-1 and TRAN-2 and was denied earlier because of some technical problem, is always at liberty to make use of the said order and upload the relevant forms during the relevant period. Petition allowed.

  ---

• 2022 (9) TMI 1333
  
  Refund of IGST and duty drawback - petitioner was categorised as a risky exporter - CBEC Circular No.131/1/2020-GST - HELD THAT:- The petitioner says, that the petitioner would be satisfied, if the respondents are directed to treat the writ petition as a representation, and determine afresh, as to whether the petitioner falls in the category of “risky exporter. The respondent no.3/Commissioner will treat the writ petition as a representation. The said respondent will also examine the stand taken by the petitioner, in its rejoinder - For this purpose, respondent no.3/Commissioner will afford an opportunity of personal hearing to the authorized representative (AR) of the petitioner. Petition disposed off.

  ---

• 2022 (9) TMI 1265
  
  Maintainability of appeal - requirement of mandatory pre-deposit - appeal rejected on the ground that the mandatory deposit should have been made from the cash ledger - HELD THAT:- After hearing the counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel, this Court finds that pre-deposit has been made by the Firm before the Appellate Authority, and the Appellate Authority shall not insist the Firm to make deposit through electronic cash ledger and shall proceed to decide the appeal on merits strictly in accordance with law. The writ petition stands partly allowed.

  ---

• 2022 (9) TMI 1264
  
  Seeking grant of Regular Bail - availment of irregular input tax credit - HELD THAT:- On perusing the material placed on record and taking into consideration the facts of the case, nature of allegations, gravity of offences, role attributed to the accused, without discussing the evidence in detail, this Court is of the opinion that this is a fit case to exercise the discretion and enlarge the applicant on regular bail. In the facts and circumstances of the present case and considering the role attributed to the applicant and the allegations levelled against him, the case of the applicant deserves consideration and, therefore, the case of the applicant needs to be considered. The applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail registered with Shahpur Police Station, Ahmedabad on executing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to the conditions imposed - bail application allowed.

  ---

• 2022 (9) TMI 1263
  
  Maintainability of appeal - time limitation - petitioner’s appeal came to be dismissed on the ground that appeal was not filed within a period of three months provided under Section 107(1) of The Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - the appeal was delayed more than one month provided under Sub Section 4 of Section 107 of the CGST Act - HELD THAT:- In the affidavit in reply it is not denied that the order in original dated 14th November 2019 was not digitally signed. In the affidavit in reply it is specifically stated that the show cause notice was digitally signed by the issuing authority but when it refers to the order in original dated 14th November 2019 there is total silence about any digital signature being put by the issuing authority. Conveniently, respondent stated that petitioner cannot take stand of not receiving the....... + More

  ---

• 2022 (9) TMI 1262
  
  Constitutional Validity of Rule 117(1) and the proviso thereto of both the CGST Rules, 2017 and Telangana GST Rules, 2017 - applicability of time limit of ninety days for filing Form GST TRAN-1 - HELD THAT:- Issue decided in the case of M/S PKL LIMITED VERSUS UNION OF INDIA [2022 (9) TMI 1193 - TELANGANA HIGH COURT] where it was held that The issue decided in the case of UNION OF INDIA & ANR. VERSUS FILCO TRADE CENTRE PVT. LTD. & ANR. [2022 (7) TMI 1232 - SC ORDER] where it was held that Goods and Service Tax Network (GSTN) is directed to open common portal for filing concerned forms for availing Transitional Credit through TRAN-1 and TRAN-2 for two months i.e. w.e.f. 01.09.2022 to 31.10.2022. Writ petition disposed off.

  ---

• 2022 (9) TMI 1261
  
  Validity of condition imposed by the second respondent in regard to the furnishing of bank guarantee for the balance of the disputed tax and penalty - HELD THAT:- Taking into account the position that the petitioner has remitted 50% of the disputed tax, the petitioner is permitted to furnish a personal bond in respect of the balance of tax and penalty, to the tune of Rs.8,89,275/- & Rs.11,30,122/- respectively within a period of four (4) weeks from today. Subject to the furnishing of personal bond by the petitioner, there shall be an order of stay of balance of the disputed tax and penalty till the disposal of the appeals by the first appellate authority. It is made clear that impugned orders dated 25.08.2022 stands modified. The Writ Petitions are disposed off.

  ---

• 2022 (9) TMI 1260
  
  Seeking stay on operation of summons - seeking restraint on respondent no. 2 from issuing any further summon - seeking permission to petitioners to join the investigation through video conferencing - HELD THAT:- A perusal of the summons issued to the petitioners shows that the petitioners were required to be present before the concerned officer on 29.08.2022 - Since that date has passed, in case the respondents/revenue wishes to issue fresh summons to the petitioners and/or its directors or officers, they will follow the guidelines provided in instruction no.3 of 2020-2023 (GST-Investigations), dated 17.08.2022. Application disposed off.

  ---

• 2022 (9) TMI 1205
  
  Seizure of goods alongwith the vehicle - goods seized on the ground that they were not accompanied with the E-way bill - HELD THAT:- The issue has been considered by the Division Bench of this Court in M/S GODREJ AND BOYCE MANUFACTURING CO. LTD., L.G. ELECTRONICS INDIA PVT. LTD., BHARTI AIRTEL LIMITED, M/S GUALA CLOSURES (INDIA) PVT. LTD., M/S. RAS POLYTEX PVT. LIMITED, RIMJHIM ISPAT LIMITED, RIMJHIM ISPAT LIMITED, M/S. GAURANG PRODUCTS PVT. LTD., M/S. ADITYA BIRLA FASHION AND RETAIL LTD., M/S. NAVYUG AIRCONDITIONING AND M/S. PROACTIVE PLAST PVT. LTD. VERSUS STATE OF U.P. AND 02 OTHERS AND STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS [2018 (9) TMI 1261 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] where it has been held that the goods were not covered with the requirement of E-way bill during 1.2.2018 to 31.3.2018. The goods in the present case were seized on 11.02.2018 that is....... + More

  ---

• 2022 (9) TMI 1204
  
  Rejection of the revocation application - Non-speaking order - earlier proceedings were dismissed on the ground that an appellate remedy is available under the Act - principles of natural justice - HELD THAT:- The order passed by the authority cancelling the application for revocation is devoid of reasons. None of the grounds raised by the appellant has been dealt with. It is not clear as to why the department has been dragging the appellant for such a long period, i.e. from August, 2021. If, according to the respondent, there is any adverse material, then a proper show cause notice should have been given to the appellant and her objection should have been invited and further affording an opportunity of personal hearing, a speaking order should have been passed. It is high time that the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes takes note of the m....... + More

  ---

• 2022 (9) TMI 1203
  
  Seeking grant of Anticipatory Bail - availment of Input Tax Credit (ITC) based on forged and fake invoices - applicant summoned under Section 70 of the Act - HELD THAT:- The allegations are much grave. It is the case of generating fake and forged invoices so as to claim ITC. In their objections, the respondent no.2 has given categorical details of such dubious transactions and has also submitted as to how in one day, the money has routed in different accounts. The applicant transferred the money in his wife’s account and, subsequently, from her account, it comes to the applicant’s account. It is a kind of act, which effects the economy of the country. Added to it is the non-cooperative attitude of the applicant during enquiry. Having considered the gravity of offence and its implications, this Court is of the view that the app....... + More

  ---

• 2022 (9) TMI 1202
  
  Detention of goods alongwith the vehicle - the e-way bill was valid up to 22nd January, 2021 and the vehicle, which was transporting the goods was intercepted on 25th January, 2021 and by then, the e-way bill had expired - mala fide intention on the part of the appellants in not extending the e-way bill and transporting the goods after the expiry of the e-way bill, or not - HELD THAT:- The learned appellate authority should consider the question as to whether there was any intentional attempt made by the appellants to evade payment of tax. Since this aspect has not been considered by the learned appellate authority, we are constrained to remand the matter to the appellate authority for fresh consideration. The appeal as well as the writ petition are disposed of and consequently, the order passed by the learned appellate authority dated 30....... + More

  ---

• 2022 (9) TMI 1201
  
  Detention of goods alongwith the vehicle - goods were not accompanied by the valid e-way bill - transaction being an export transaction - wilful intention on the part of the appellants not to generate any e-way bill, or not - Section 129 of GST Act - HELD THAT:- On perusal of the order passed by the first appellate authority, it is found that such exercise has not been done. Therefore, one more opportunity can be granted to the appellants to show their bona fides. This appeal as well as the writ petition are disposed of and the order passed by the appellate authority dated 30th November, 2021 is set aside and the matter stands remanded to the appellate authority. The appeal shall stand restored in the file of the appellate authority and the appellants shall appear before the appellate authority and produce all documents to establish their....... + More

  ---

• 2022 (9) TMI 1200
  
  Maintainability of petition - availability of alternative remedy or not - Section 107(1) of the West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - HELD THAT:- No useful purpose would be served in keeping the writ petition pending and the suggested direction would not only take care the interest of the appellants but also would safeguard the interest of revenue. Accordingly, the appeal and the writ petition are disposed of with the directions imposed. The appellants are directed to file a statutory appeal within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of the server copy of this judgment and order and remit 10% of the disputed tax along with the appeal memorandum. Upon such payment of the 10% of the disputed tax and filing the appeal, the Assistant Commissioner of Revenue shall address the appellants’ bankers and keep in abeyance the garnishee notice so as to enable the appellants to operate their bank account. Application disposed off.

  ---

• 2022 (9) TMI 1199
  
  Maintainability of petition - appealable order or not - opportunity of hearing provided or not - Section 74(9) of the WBGST Act, 2017/ CGST Act 2017 - HELD THAT:- It is found that the authority has recorded that the Registered Tax Prayer (RTP), namely, the appellant has neither appeared nor filed any reply to the intimation given to the appellant. There are no need to go into the controversy as to whether the documents were submitted and as to whether the authority concerned, namely, the Assistant Commissioner of Revenue, State Tax had received those documents as this Court is of the view that one more opportunity can be granted to the appellant to submit all the documents and the cancellation of registration was not justified. If these have been adopted, it will not only safeguard the interests of the appellant but also aid the revenue w....... + More

  ---

• 2022 (9) TMI 1198
  
  Detention of goods alongwith the vehicle - goods are tax free animal feed supplement with HSN 2309 or not - residue/waste of distillery covered under HSN 2303 or not - HELD THAT:- The legality of the order dated 11.01.2021 (Annexure P-5) passed by the Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, Bathinda raising demand of tax/penalty need not be gone into at this stage. Such view is being taken for the reason that the facts of the case make out a case for remand to the Appellate Authority for reconsideration. Perusal of the impugned order dated 29.06.2022 at Annexure P-7 passed by the Appellate Authority would clearly show that the submissions/grounds raised by the petitioner in the statutory appeal have not even been adverted to, much less dealt with. The impugned order passed by the Appellate Authority, as such, cannot sustain. The present writ p....... + More

  ---

• 2022 (9) TMI 1197
  
  Proper officer - Validity of issue of Authorization for access to Business premises issued under Section 71(1) of the Andhra Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - contrary to Sub-Section 91 of Section 2 read with Section 5(1) and 5(3) of the APGST Act or not - whether the authorization given to the second respondent herein by the Joint Commissioner is valid in law? - HELD THAT:- A reading of Section 71(1) of the APGST Act, clearly demonstrate that any Officer under this Act, authorized by a Proper Officer not below the rank of Joint Commissioner shall have access to place of any business of registered person to inspect the books of accounts, documents - The Proper Officer referred to in Section 71(1) of the Act would mean the Chief Commissioner or the Officer of the State who is assigned that function by the Chief Commissioner as def....... + More

  ---

• 2022 (9) TMI 1196
  
  Seeking grant of Regular Bail (second bail application) - availment of inadmissible input tax credit - Section 132 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 read with Section 132 of Union Territory Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 read with Section 132 of State(s) Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and Section 20 of Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - HELD THAT:- The petitioner earlier also filed bail petition before this Court vide CRM-M-1315-2022 which was dismissed by way of passing a detailed order vide Annexure P-4 on the ground that material witnesses are yet to be examined and also considering the apprehension expressed by the the learned counsel for the respondent that in case the petitioner is released on bail then he may influence witnesses or may tamper with evidence or may flee from justice. There is no change of....... + More

  ---

12345........ 222