Advanced Search Options
GST - Case Laws
Showing 101 to 120 of 3965 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 (11) TMI 109 - DELHI HGIH COURT
Grant of anticipatory bail - Jurisdiction of learned ASJ, Rohini to pass such order - it is contended that the jurisdiction lies with the learned ACMM and/or learned ASJ, Patiala House Court - HELD THAT:- Now since the bail extended till 30.10.2020 is also expiring, hence the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this petition would in any case become infructuous and as such intends to withdraw the same but seeks a direction to the learned trial court that whenever a fresh application is moved, notice be issued to the department. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits he shall move an appropriate application before the learned Additional Session’s Court to apprise him of his jurisdiction and to give notice to the petitioner/department. Petition disposed off.
- 2020 (11) TMI 108 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Permission to correct Form GSTR-1 for the period August 2017 to December 2017 and redistribute the credit available from the IGST column to the CGST and SGST fields - HELD THAT:- A registered person who files a return under Section 39(1) involving intra-State outward supply is to indicate the collection of taxes customer-wise in monthly return in Form GSTR-1 and the details of tax payment therein are auto populated in Form GSTR -2-A of the buyers. Any mismatch between Form GSTR-1 and Form GSTR-2A is to be notified by the recipient by way of a tabulation in Form GSTR-1A. Admittedly, Forms in GSTR-2A and GSTR-1A are yet to be notified as on date. The statutory procedure contemplated for seamless availment is, as on date, unavailable. Undoubtedly, the petitioner in this case has committed an error in filing of the details relating to credit........ + More
- 2020 (11) TMI 107 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Interest on delayed payment of tax - Refund of amount deposited earlier at the instance of Department - Interpretation of Section 50 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, particularly the effective date of application of the proviso inserted vide Section 100 of Finance (No.2) Act of 2019 - HELD THAT:- Under the second proviso to Section 43B, assessees were entitled to deduction only if the contribution to provident fund (PF) stood credited on or before the due date as set out under the Provident Funds Act - This presented a difficulty since the financial year for companies ended on the 31st of March of the particular financial year whereas, the accounting period of the Provident Fund Commissioner ended after the due date for filing of income tax returns. Thus, an assessee, who had made the statutory deposit within the due date ....... + More
- 2020 (11) TMI 106 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
Migration from VAT to GST regime - direction to respondents to issue password to the petitioner against the provisional ID - H4ELD THAT:- Notice of motion. Mr. Sourabh Goel, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of the respondents No. 1 and 2 and Mr. Ankur Mittal, Addl. A.G., Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of respondents No. 3 and 4. The present petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No. 2 - Goods and Services Tax Network to consider and decide the E-mail (Annexure P-13) in accordance with law within six weeks from the receipt of the certified copy of the judgment.
- 2020 (11) TMI 105 - NATIONAL ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
Profiteering - DSLR Cameras - Power Banks - allegation that the reduction in the rate of tax not passed on - contravention of section 171 of CGST Act - Penalty - HELD THAT:- While the commensurate base price of the Power Bank was ₹ 385.94, the actual sale price was ₹ 418.84, the cost price has been claimed to be ₹ 774.03. By no stretch of imagination such an unreasonable claim can be accepted. Similar claims have been made by him in respect of other products also. The Respondent has not produced any evidence during the course of the present proceedings which can establish the exorbitant moving cost prices claimed by the Respondent. The screen shots of the SAP system can also not be accepted as the conclusive proof of the cost movement as the Respondent is free to make any entries in the above system as per his convenienc....... + More
- 2020 (11) TMI 104 - NATIONAL ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
Profiteering - purchase of Short Capuccino - allegation that the Respondent had not passed on the benefit of reduction in the GST rate on restaurant service - contravention of section 171 of CGST Act - Penalty - HELD THAT:- The Respondent has profiteered to the tune of ₹ 1 ,04, 70,664/- during the period from 15.11.2017 to 30.06.2018 which he is required to pass on to the buyers by commensurately fixing prices of his products after taking in to account the impact of denial of ITC, which he has not done and hence he has violated the provisions of Section 171 (1) of the CGST Act, 2017. Accordingly, as per the provisions of Section 171(2) of the above Act read with Rule 133 (1) of the CGST Rules, 2017 the profiteered amount is determined as ₹ 1,04,70,664/-. The Respondent is directed to reduce the prices of his products as per th....... + More
- 2020 (11) TMI 72 - THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY UNDER GST, ANDHRA PRADESH
Levy of tax - estimated by-products value, which are retained by the millers as part of custom milling activity, treating these compensatory products value as part of value of supply - HELD THAT:- The value of by-products so retained by the appellant yielded during CMR milling, which were allowed to be retained by the appellant to meet the CMR activity cost shall obviously be included as part of value of supply and also to be termed as a bona fide form of consideration, hence the levy of tax on the resultant value of these products treating as value of supply need to be upheld as legitimate and tax so levied and impugned orders passed by the assessing authority is confirmed and the appeal on this aspect stands dismissed. Levy of tax on estimated sale value of rice bran - HELD THAT:- The appellant has not put-forth any arguments and also n....... + More
- 2020 (11) TMI 53 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Seeking a direction to the Respondents to allow/extend the time limit for submitting Forms GSTR-9 and 9C for the Financial Year 2018-19 upto 31st December, 2020 without any adverse consequences to the assessees - HELD THAT:- Today when the matter is called upon, learned counsel for the petitioner has circulated a press release issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs on 24th October, 2020 extending the due dates for filing of annual return and reconciliation statement for the financial year 2018-19. The due dates for filing annual return (Form GSTR - 9 /GSTR - 9A) and reconciliation statement (Form GSTR - 9C) for the financial year 2018-19 has been extended from 31st October, 2020 to 31st December, 2020. It is stated therein that notification to give effect to the said decision would follow. Petition closed.
- 2020 (11) TMI 42 - THE COMMISSIONER OF GST (APPEALS), JAIPUR
Refund claim of accumulated ITC - rejected on the ground that the appellant had generated ARN for NIL amount, as such no amount had been Debited from their Electronic Credit Ledger, whereas the appellant was required to Debit the amount of refund being claimed as per Rule 89(3) of the CGST Rules, 2017 - HELD THAT:- The appellant was unable to Debit their ITC Ledger through FORM GST DRC-03 because of error in system, GST common portal did not allow to Debit the amount from their available balance in ITC ledger and for this they have made several complaints at various appropriate platforms i.e. help desk, vide Ticket No. 201908196732382, 201908276814243 & 201909026862788 and also filed the complaint to adjudicating authority and also O/o the Principal Commissioner, CGST but no solution were found. The appellant vide letter dated 20-11-2....... + More
- 2020 (11) TMI 40 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Jurisdiction - power to arrest - whether the power to arrest as provided under section 69 read with section 132 of the CGST Act can be invoked by the Commissioner only upon completion of the adjudication process of finalising the assessment and determination of liability as per the provisions of the CGST Act? HELD THAT:- In the absence of any cogent or credible material, if the subjective satisfaction is arrived at by the authority concerned for the purpose of arrest under Section 69 of the Act, then such action amounts to malice in law. Malice in its legal sense means such malice as may be assumed from the doing of a wrongful act intentionally but also without just cause or excuse or for want of reasonable or probable cause. Any use of discretionary power exercised for an unauthorized purpose amounts to malice in law. It is immaterial wh....... + More
- 2020 (11) TMI 32 - SC ORDER
Permission for manual filing of GST TRAN-1 - Transitional credit - migration to GST regime - Section 140 (3) of the CGST Act, 2017 - HELD THAT:- Issue Notice. List the matter along with Diary No. 38404 of 2019.
- 2020 (11) TMI 24 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Liability to pay interest u/s 50 on Net Tax liability or Gross tax (GST) without adjustment of ITC - Refund of amount wrongly forfeited from the pending refund application of the petitioner - HELD THAT:- It is apparent that for the period of 1st July, 2017 to 31st August, 2020 field formations have been instructed to recover interest only on the net cash liability i.e. that portion of the tax that has been paid by debiting the electronic cash ledger or is payable through cash ledger. In those cases where show case notices have been issued calling upon the noticees to make payment on gross tax liability, those have been directed to be kept in the Call Book till retrospective amendment is made in Section 50 of the CGST Act. The present writ petition is disposed of in accordance with the Administrative Instruction dated 18th September, 2020 issued by the Ministry of Finance through the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs.
- 2020 (11) TMI 1 - THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY UNDER GST, ANDHRA PRADESH
Principles of Natural Justice - Refund of unutilized input tax - zero rated supply - refund rejected solely on the ground that as per Section 54(3)(i) read with Rule 89(2)(f) of the GST Law, the provisions for refund of unutilized input tax is available to only those taxpayer who made supplies to SEZ Unit or the Developer - Whether the rejection of refund claim by the AA, is in tune with the provisions of (CGST/SGST) APGST Act, 2017 or not? HELD THAT:- On comprehending the Rule 89(1), the second proviso unambiguously stipulates that in respect of supplies to SEZ units/developers, the refund “SHALL” be claimed by suppliers of goods to the SEZ unit or developer only. Further, Rule 89(2)(f) prescribes that SEZ unit/developers shall not avail input tax credit on the supplies received by them from non SEZ suppliers and refund would....... + More
- 2020 (10) TMI 1217 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Transitional Credit - submission of declaration in Form GST TRAN-1 on 27th December, 2017 in time - vires of Articles 14, 265 and 300-A of the Constitution of India - HELD THAT:- In this case, we are not examining the issue whether the Petitioner is entitled to VAT tax credit as claimed by the Petitioner which will be examined by the authorities. What we are concerned with is that despite the admitted successful filing of Form TRAN-1 by the Petitioner on 27th December, 2017, the request of the Petitioner for transitioning of credit has not been approved by the ITGRC merely on the basis that there were no technical glitches on the GSTN side. There is no further explanation or clarification or evidence on the issue by the Respondents. Even the learned Sr. Counsel for the Respondents has only reiterated this stand during his submission. The ....... + More
- 2020 (10) TMI 1216 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
Grant of regular bail - Sections 132(1)(b)(c) of the Punjab Goods and Service Tax Act - HELD THAT:- The criminal trial for the offences under Section 132 of the PGST Act, 2017 as also the arrest under Section 69 are without jurisdiction, having no backing of the constitutional provisions - The petitioner has been in custody for a period of 4 months and 14 day. The trial will take time to conclude, especially due to prevailing situation of Covid-19. The moot question of law regarding the stage of initiation of prosecution under the Finance Act is involved; complaint is triable by a Magistrate; the petitioner is not required for further custodial investigation - Thus, the petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Duty Magistrate, subject to him furnishing bail/surety bonds.
- 2020 (10) TMI 1215 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Confiscation of vehicle alongwiith the goods - owner/driver/person in charge of the goods conveyance Shri has not tendered any documents for the goods in movement - defective documents - E-Way bill not tendered - HELD THAT:- The writ applicant is engaged in the business of Tobacco etc. The writ applicant holds registration under the GST. The writ applicant received an order for supply of 14694 Kgs of Tobacco from a firm situated at Meghalaya running in the name of M/s. J.J. Exports & Imports. A show-cause notice was issued to the writ applicant in Form GST MOV-10 calling upon the writ applicant to show-cause as to why the goods and the conveyance should not be confiscated under Section 130 of the GST Act, 2017. It appears that before the writ applicant could respond to the notice issued in Form GST MOV-10, the final order of confiscat....... + More
- 2020 (10) TMI 1214 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Removal of Provisional attachment of Bank Accounts - Section 83 of the GST Act, 2017 - HELD THAT:- Section 83 talks about the opinion which is necessary to be formed for the purpose of protecting the interest of the government revenue. Any opinion of the authority to be formed is not subject to objective test. The language leaves no room for the relevance of an official examination as to the sufficiency of the ground on which the authority may act in forming its opinion. But, at the same time, there must be material based on which alone the authority could form its opinion that it has become necessary to order provisional attachment of the goods or the bank account to protect the interest of the government revenue. The existence of relevant material is a precondition to the formation of opinion. The use of the word “may” indic....... + More
- 2020 (10) TMI 1174 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Effective date of registration certificate - conversion of the provisional registration to a permanent registration - HELD THAT:- The procedure that had to be followed by the petitioner for obtaining a registration under the GST, in circumstances where he was already a registered dealer under the erstwhile KVAT Act, is the one prescribed in Rule 24 of the GST Rules. It is not in dispute that the petitioner applied for a registration in accordance with Rule 24 and was in fact granted a provisional registration as evident from Ext.P1 certificate dated 28.06.2017. It is also significant to note that thereafter, the provisional registration granted to the petitioner was not formally cancelled by the respondents by following the procedure envisaged under the Act for cancellation of the provisional registration. Under such circumstances, the pe....... + More
- 2020 (10) TMI 1173 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Interest on late payment of GST - Calculation of Interest - whether the interest could be demanded only on the net liability and not on gross liability? - HELD THAT:- Amendment to section 50 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 was introduced by Finance (No.2) Act, 2019 for charging interest on the net cash tax liability. The said amendment was made effective prospectively from 01.09.2020 vide the Central Government notification No.63/2020-Central Tax dated 25.08.2020. GST Council in its 39th meeting recommended that interest should be charged on the net cash tax liability with effect from 01.07.2017. Recommendation was made for making the amendment to section 50 retrospectively with effect from 01.07.2017. It is stated that retrospective amendment in the GST laws would be carried out in the due course through suitable legislati....... + More
- 2020 (10) TMI 1172 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT
Jurisdiction - Time Limitation for availment of Input Tax Credit - HELD THAT:- The instant matter does not fall within the subject matter assigned to this Bench. Therefore, let the matter be listed before the appropriate Division Bench, as per the present distribution of roster.