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 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-- 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 - Case Laws

Showing 101 to 120 of 5070 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 (5) TMI 813 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, MAHARASHTRA
  
  Supply of services or deemed supply - Liaison office - applicant connects businesses in India with business partners in Dubai - intermediary - non-profit organization - requirement to obtain registration or not - levy of GST - HELD THAT:- While on one hand applicant has submitted that it is not undertaking any supply, on the other hand applicant accepts that it connects businesses in India with business partners in Dubai, which is nothing but supply of services. Thus the applicant acts as a conduit between some business partners in Dubai and certain businesses in India. It therefore appears that the applicant is acting as an intermediary in the subject case. Intermediary - HELD THAT:- The applicant is satisfying all the conditions of an intermediary and there are no hesitation in holding that, the applicant is an intermediary. As per the ....... + More

---

• 2021 (5) TMI 811 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
  
  Correction of mistake in the return - contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that certain mistakes have crept in at the time of filing the GSTR-1 in Form B2B, due to which the invoice had been reflected in column B2Chf though the petitioner had paid all taxes as and when they were due - HELD THAT:- Without entering into the merits of the claim of the petitioner, the present petition is being disposed of with a direction that the petitioner may file a fresh representation raising all his grievances before the competent authority which according to Sri Dhananjay Awasthi learned Advocate is Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise Jhansi Division, Jhansi.

---

• 2021 (5) TMI 809 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
  
  Confirmation of demand of GST with interest and penalty - Non filing of reply to Show Cause notice (SCN) - non-compliance of mandatory provisions of sub-section (4) of Section 75 of the CGST Act, 2017 - Opportunity of hearing - HELD THAT:- In the instant case, admittedly, proposing an adverse action, by way of a show cause notice, 1st respondent initiated action under the above provision of law. It is evident from a reading of the impugned order that on the ground that the petitioner herein failed to respond to the show cause notice by way of filing objections, 1st respondent herein confirmed the demand. When such a course of action is adopted by 1st respondent herein prejudicial to the interest of the assessee, the mandatory requirements of law as provided under sub-section (4) of Section 75 of the CGST Act, 2017 are required to be follo....... + More

---

• 2021 (5) TMI 772 - DELHI HIGH COURT
  
  Cancellation of registration of petitioner - validity of SCN - HELD THAT:- The record presently available shows that prior to the issuance of the aforesaid order, a show cause notice dated 05.01.2021 was served on the petitioner and the petitioner was called upon to file a reply to the same within seven working days from the date of service of the said notice - However, a perusal of the show cause notice shows that it is internally inconsistent. Mr. Mahana says, the authorized representative of the petitioner had appeared before the concerned officer pursuant to service of the show cause notice dated 05.01.2021 - issue notice to the respondents via all permissible modes including email. List the matter on 12.07.2021.

---

• 2021 (5) TMI 767 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
  
  Power u/s 83 as well as under Section 5(3) off KGST Act - designation of proper officer in terms of Sections 83(1) and 5(3) of the Act be adjudicated upon - Power to attach bank accounts - Invoice was not available for claiming Input Tax Credit - HELD THAT:- Statement is made by the learned Additional Government Advocate that on the basis of the material available necessary report would be sent to the concerned to initiate assessment proceedings as per law and that they do not intend to further proceed with the proceedings under Section 67 of the Act and such submission is stated to be made under instructions of the respondent No.3. The petitioner may be called upon to secure the interest of the revenue. In light of the said stand by putting the petitioner on terms while noticing the absence of the invoice, at the present point in time as....... + More

---

• 2021 (5) TMI 705 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
  
  Grant of Bail - GST evasion - petitioner has remained in custody for a period of about one year and seven months - HELD THAT:- 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/- - Bail application allowed.

---

• 2021 (5) TMI 704 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
  
  Grant of Bail - GST evasion - involvment of CA - availment by passing of ITC wrongfully by creating 38 fake firms - HELD THAT:- This bail application filed on behalf of the petitioner deserves to be dismissed; for the reasons, firstly, the petitioner failed to appear before the Department while notices were issued to him, secondly, even after filing of complaint before the learned Trial court, he remained absconded for about one year and thirdly, the petitioner is a chartered accountant, who is master mind of the crime and he has created 38 fake firms and availed ITC wrongfully to the tune of ₹ 6,36,32,492/-. No case is made out to release the petitioner on bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. - Bail application dismissed.

---

• 2021 (5) TMI 701 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
  
  Grant of Bail - GST evasion - petitioner being CA was instrumental in registration of 11 fake firms and these firms have availed fraudulent input tax credit - HELD THAT:- Taking note of the fact that Chartered Accountant has remained in custody for a period of one year and five months and that petitioner is also having a child and also considering the contentions put forth by counsel for the petitioner, it is deemed proper to allow the bail application. 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 - Bail application allowed.

---

• 2021 (5) TMI 674 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
  
  Bail application - petitioner was acting as middleman by procuring GST registration pertaining to defunct companies - petitioner was receiving commission for selling the details of GST registration of defunct companies - section 132 (5) of the CGST Act - HELD THAT:- In the case on hand, it is the insistent stand of the respondent that the value of fraud is to the tune of around ₹ 55 Crores - A perusal of record shows that there are serious allegations against the present petitioner, who is the one of the main accused, that he along with co-accused, by perpetrating fraud and through paper transactions have claimed the relief to the tune of more than ₹ 55 Crores. The case is at preliminary stage and enlarging the petitioner at this point of time on bail would have a detrimental effect on the investigation. Further, without his r....... + More

---

• 2021 (5) TMI 621 - DELHI HIGH COURT
  
  Service of summons - respondent submits that the summons are like spent bullets, and therefore, have become inefficacious - HELD THAT:- Mr. Bansal, on instructions, says, no steps for criminal prosecution qua the petitioner have been triggered based on the impugned summons. The writ petition is closed.

---

• 2021 (5) TMI 618 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT
  
  Recovery of GST while the appeal is pending - requirement with the pre-deposit - section 107 (7) of JGST Act - HELD THAT:- In view of the specific provision of sub-Sections 6 & 7 of Section 107 of the JGST Act and in view of the admitted position that the subsequent garnishee notices dated 15.01.2021 covers both the appeals filed by the petitioner, this Court is of the view that on account of pre-deposit which has been made by the petitioner at appellate stage read with the mandate of section 107 (7) of JGST Act, the petitioner deserves an interim protection. The counsel for the State may seek instructions and file response to the affidavit dated 24.03.2021 and also give appropriate explanation for the statement made in the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of respondent No.-2 which prima-facie appears to be incorrect, in view of the ....... + More

---

• 2021 (5) TMI 617 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
  
  Carry forward of ITC - ITC, as per tran-1, was not reflected in the Electronic Credit Ledger - only grievance is that in the Electronic Credit Ledger, ITC has not been carried forward - HELD THAT:- Reliance placed in the case of Hon'ble Division Bench of the Delhi High Court in M/S. BLUE BIRD PURE PVT. LTD. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. [2019 (7) TMI 1102 - DELHI HIGH COURT]. In the said case also, the dealer had committed an inadvertent error in showing the available stock of goods in column 7(d) of the Form insetad of 7(a) of the Form - It was held in the case that In the present case, the Court is satisfied that, although the failure was on the part of the Petitioner to fill up the data concerning its stock in Column 7(d) of Form TRAN-1instead of Column 7(a), the error was inadvertent. The Respondents ought to have provided in t....... + More

---

• 2021 (5) TMI 601 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
  
  Violation of principles of natural justice - validity of ex-parte assessment orders of the 1st respondent - Section 75(4) and 126(3) of the TNGST Act - HELD THAT:- The impugned order of assessment has been passed on 07.02.2020, whereas personal hearing has been on 03.12.2020, after much latter the impugned order of assessment made, which clearly shows non-application of mind on the part of the 1st respondent. Even the Deputy Commissioner (ST)(Int), Madurai, has filed an appeal under Section 107 of TNGST Act, before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (Appeal), Goods and Service Tax, Madurai, as against the above said assessment orders passed by the 1st respondent, dated 07.02.2020, pointing out certain deficiency. In such view of the matter, no doubt in my mind that there is total non-application of mind on the part of the 1st respondent in....... + More

---

• 2021 (5) TMI 599 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
  
  Intermediaries helped in rotating the money between the buyers and sellers of various goods and services - Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 read with Section 120(E) IPC and Sections 132 (1) (i) read with Section 132(1) and (f) of the APGST Act, 2017 - HELD THAT:- The investigation in this complaint may go on. However, no coercive steps will be taken against the petitioners including arrest as and when they appear before the Investigating Officer on 22.04.2021 by petitioner NO.2 and 24.04.2021 by petitioner No.l or such further dates without obtaining further orders from this Court. Post on 05.05.2021, in the motion list." 2440/2021

---

• 2021 (5) TMI 598 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
  
  Transitional input tax credit - Request for availing transitional credit rejected on the ground that the tax payer has no technical glitches in filing TRAN-1 as per the system logs - HELD THAT:- The writ appeals preferred by the Union of India have been dismissed. However, as the period to file TRAN-1 has been expired on 30.08.2020, the respondents-assessees were granted time to file/revise TRAN-1 up to 31.03.2021, meaning thereby more than six month’s time was granted to the assesses therein. While dismissing the present writ appeal, 30 days time is granted to the assessees to submit their GST TRAN-1 from today - Appeal dismissed.

---

• 2021 (5) TMI 593 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
  
  Detention of goods under Section 129(1) of CGST Act - Invoice number mentioned in Tax invoice not tallied with E-way bill - HELD THAT:- The issue some what identical to the case on hand came up for consideration before the Division Bench of this Court in ANNAM JEWELLERS VERSUS DEPUTY COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER AND ANOTHER [1996 (3) TMI 492 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT]. In the said case, the Writ Petitioners were engaged in the business of gold and silver articles. The premises was inspected by the 1st Respondent, and on verification of the stocks, the inspecting authority got recorded statements from the writ petitioners to the effect that the petitioners were liable to pay tax under Section 6A of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957, and accordingly, collected the tax as well as the penalty, which was five times that of the tax pay....... + More

---

• 2021 (5) TMI 557 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
  
  Vires of Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules as amended by Notification No.54/2018-Central Tax dated 9.10.2018 - retrospective operation to N/N. 4/2018-Central Tax dated 9.10.2018 - HELD THAT:- The Coordinate Bench in COSMO FILMS LIMITED VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & 3 ORS. [2020 (10) TMI 1099 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] took the view that the notification No. 54 of 2018 should be made applicable with effect from 23.10.2017 and not prior thereto i.e. from the inception of Rule 97(10) of the CGST Act. It is the Notification No. 54 of 2018 dated 09.10.2018. According to Mr. Sheth, the Notification itself makes it clear that the same shall come into force from the date of its publication in the official gazette. According to Mr. Sheth, what has been observed in the case mentioned, it needs to be relooked, as the Department has started issuing notices indi....... + More

---

• 2021 (5) TMI 528 - DELHI HIGH COURT
  
  Provisional attachment of Bank accounts of petitioner / Director of the company - availment of ITC against fake/ineligible invoices - HELD THAT:- There is nothing in the statement of the petitioner, which would show, that she had anything to do with the purported illegal transaction said to have been carried out between Milkfood Ltd. [i.e., the taxable person], and its suppliers. The petitioner claimed, in her voluntary statement, that she was paid ₹ 1.50 crores in the FY 2019-2020 for rendering services in her capacity as a mentor/advisor to Milkfood Ltd. Therefore, even if we assume, for the moment, that, since investigations are on against the taxable person, and therefore, proceedings are pending under Section 67 of the Act, there is nothing placed on record to show that there was material available with the respondent, linking ....... + More

---

• 2021 (5) TMI 505 - COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICE TAX, JAIPUR
  
  Revocation of cancellation of registration - non filing of returns for a continuous period of six months - non submission of reply to the SCN within the time specified therein - HELD THAT:- The adjudicating authority has cancelled their registration due to non filing of GSTR-3B returns for the period Ist March-2019 to till date i.e. 10.06.2020 and effective date of cancellation of registration is 10.06.2020 whereas in the second proviso of Notification No.52/2020-Central Tax dated 24th June 2020 it is clearly stated that where the total amount of central tax payable in the said return is nil, the total amount of late fee payable for a tax period, under section 47 of the said Act shall stand waived for the registered person who failed to furnish the return in FORM GSTR-3B for the period of July, 2017 to January, 2020. In the instant case, ....... + More

---

• 2021 (5) TMI 497 - GUJARATAT HIGH COURT
  
  Seizure of goods alongwith the vehicle - e-invoice and e-way bill were not available at the time of interception - e-invoice and e-way bill were produced before the competent authority - Confiscation order - HELD THAT:- The petitioner approached the authorities for provisional release of goods under Section 67(6) of the GST Act on 30.04.2021. It is stated that by a communication dated 03.05.2021, the authority declined the provisional release of goods. Let Notice be issued making it returnable on 20.05.2021.

---