Advanced Search Options
GST - Case Laws
Showing 3781 to 3800 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.
- 2019 (3) TMI 485 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Grant of regular bail - offence punishable under Section 132 (1) (a), (b) and (c) of Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017 - issuance of fake invoices to get input tax credit - main accused have not been arrested so far - Held that:- U/s. 69 of the GST Act, the Commissioner is having power to arrest if he has reasons to believe that a person has committed an offence specified in Clause (a) or (b) or (c) of sub-section (1) of Section 132 of the GST Act. Section 132(1) (a), (b) and (c) of GST Act define types of offences and according to which, whoever commits offence of supply of any goods or services without issue of any invoice or issues any invoice or bill without supply of goods or services of both or avails input tax credit using such invoice, shall be punished with imprisonment of term which may extend to 5 years and with fine, if the a....... + More
- 2019 (3) TMI 435 - APPELLATE AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, KARNATAKA
Valuation - inclusion of amortized cost of the tools in assessable value - tools are supplied by the customer free of cost and used by the Appellant in the manufacture of the components - Section 15 of the CGST Act read with Rule 27 of CGST Rules - challenge to AAR decision - Held that:- Under the erstwhile Central Excise regime, Rule 6 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000 required an assessee to calculate the intrinsic value of the excisable goods by including any additional consideration flowing directly or indirectly from the buyer to the assessee - Under the GST regime of taxation, the taxable event which attracts the levy of GST is the ‘supply’ of goods or services, in terms of Section 9 of the CGST (and SGST) Act or Section 5 of the IGST Act, depending on whether the transaction of ‘supply’ is intrasta....... + More
- 2019 (3) TMI 434 - APPELLATE AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING MAHARASHTRA
Classification of goods - marine paints supplied by the Appellant - whether the goods are to be considered to be part of ship and accordingly, be then classified under S. No. 252 of the Schedule I of the Notification No. 1/2017? - rate of tax - N/N. 1/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 - Held that:- Notification No.1/2017 dt.28.06.2017 prescribes the applicable rate of CGST. The paints supplied by the appellant are classifiable under Chapter heading 3208 and 3209 which are covered under Schedule IV of the said Notification and liable to GST @ 28%. However, under the same rate notification, Schedule-I which covers goods taxable @ 2.5% CGST has entry No.252 which covers parts (classifiable under any chapter) of goods, falling under heading 8901,8902,8904, 8905,8906 and 8907. In common parlance, paints generally means any liquid which ....... + More
- 2019 (3) TMI 433 - APPELLATE AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING MAHARASHTRA
Classification of goods - Reactor - classified under HSN 8413 91 or HSN 8421 21 90? - Held that:- The impugned product is not fitted with the hand pumps at the time of manufacturing of the hand pumps, rather it is retrofitted with the hand pumps with the purpose different from the hand pumps whose main function is to draw the underground water from the bore well whereas the primary function of the impugned product is to purify the water. Thus, the impugned product is not an essential part of the hand pumps because hand pump can function even without the impugned product. Rather it can be construed as accessory fitted to the hand pumps having the characteristics of the water purifier which adds to the value of the product- in this case, water- obtained from the main equipment/machines- in the instant case, the Hand Pump. The impugned produ....... + More
- 2019 (3) TMI 432 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
E-way bill - confiscation of goods - Procedure to be followed in case where any goods are in transit in contravention of the provision of the Act or the rules made thereunder - Held that:- The attention of the court was invited to the impugned show cause notice dated 1.3.2019, to submit that the same seeks to impose penalty, redemption fine and confiscation under section 130 of the Act without initiating any proceedings under section 129 of the Act, which is not permissible in law - Issue Notice returnable on 8th March, 2019.
- 2019 (3) TMI 431 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Bail application - offence punishable under Section 132 of Central Goods and Services Tax Act - it is alleged that petitioners have obtained Invoices from the Company of the respondent without delivery of the goods - Held that:- On reading of Sections 132, 138 and 139 of the G.S.T. Act, it is found that the maximum punishment provided under the Act is five years and fine and if that is taken into consideration, the magnitude of the alleged offence and it is not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Even as per the said provision, the alleged offence is also compoundable with the Authority, who has initiated the said proceedings. The only consideration which the Court has to consider while releasing the petitioners on anticipatory bail is, that whether the petitioners can be secured for the purpose of investigation or for the pur....... + More
- 2019 (3) TMI 430 - NATIONAL ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
Profiteering - printing cartridges - benefit of reduction in the GST rates not passed on - section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017 - Held that:- It is clear that anyone alleging profiteering can file a complaint. So it is not necessary that the complainant has to purchase the products, Moreover, all the details are available so the question of not considering the compliant do not arise at all. Even the MRP that is manually written happens to be correct MRP as admitted by the respondent. Therefore, the Standing Commitee has rightly forwarded the same the DGAP and the DGAP has accordingly completed its investigation and filed his report. In the present case, we are concerned with the supplier and the supplier is the respondent who has increased the price even after reduction of GST rate of tax. The passing of the benefit by the distributor or ret....... + More
- 2019 (3) TMI 429 - NATIONAL ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
Profiteering - Caribbean Wood Tile - benefit of reduction in the rate of tax no passed on - contravention of Section 171 of the Central Goods & Service Tax (CGST) Act, 2017 - Held that:- There was no reduction of tax with the introduction of GST. The DGAP on examining various facts has categorically mentioned that the invoices very clearly show that no VAT was levied and CST was also exempted prior to 01.07.2017. In fact the rate of tax has increased from Central Excise Duty 13.97% to GST 28% w.e.f. 01.07.2017. Therefore, the allegation of profiteering is not sustainable in terms of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017 as there has been no reduction in the rate of tax. There is no merit in the application - application dismissed.
- 2019 (3) TMI 374 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Maintainability of petition - alternative remedy of appeal - order passed under Section 73 (9) of the U.P. GST Act, 2017 - Held that:- The aforesaid order is appellable under Section 107 of the U.P. GST Act - In view of the statutory provision for appeal we are not inclined to entertain the petition at all - petition dismissed.
- 2019 (3) TMI 373 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Anticipatory Bail - offence punishable under Section 137 of Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - input tax credit - continuous issuance of fake invoices without actual supply of goods - whether the alleged offences are non cognizable or cognizable? - Held that:- The issue has been dealt in by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Om Prakash & Anr. v. Union of India & Anr. [2011 (9) TMI 65 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA], where it was held that on a construction of the definitions of the different expressions used in the Code and also in connected enactments in respect of a non-cognizable offence, a police officer, and, in the instant case an Excise Officer, will have no authority to make an arrest without obtaining a warrant for the said purpose. A close glancing of the above proposition of law with present Act, the punishment impos....... + More
- 2019 (3) TMI 372 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Prayer for withdrawal of petition - Filing of Form TRAN-1 - input tax credit - transition to GST Regime - Petitioner submitted that after filing of the writ petition certain new developments have taken place and a communication has been received from the respondent office. Accordingly, prayer was made that he may be allowed to withdraw the present petition with liberty to the petitioner to file fresh one on the same cause of action with better particulars. Held that:- Petition dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for.
- 2019 (3) TMI 371 - NATIONAL ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
Profiteering - Melaglow Rich (Niacinamide) Depigmentation & Glow Restoration Cream - situation post implementation of GST - benefit of reduction in the rate of tax/input tax credit not passed on - increase in MRP by tampering the label - contravention of the provisions of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017 - penalty. First objection raised by Respondent No. 1 states that Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017 was not applicable in the instant case since its scope was restricted to the cases where there was reduction in the rate of GST on the supply of the goods or services and a reduction in the rate of GST, did not extend to a reduction in the rate of tax when compared with the pre-GST indirect tax regime rates - Held that:- IT would be appropriate to mention that the main objective of introducing the GST was to subsume multiple central and st....... + More
- 2019 (3) TMI 370 - THE NATIONAL ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
Profiteering - Ceramic Vitrified Tiles - benefit in the reduction of rate of tax not passed on - contravention of Section 171 (1) of the CGST Act, 2017 - N/N. 41/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 14.11.2017 - Held that:- It is clear that the base price of the product per box was ₹ 232.50 prior to 15.11.2017 and had remained the same even after GST rate reduction w.e.f. 15.11.2017. Therefore, the benefit of rate reduction appears to have been passed on. This Authority agrees with the DGAP's Report dated 28.09.2018 and accordingly, holds that the allegation of profiteering is not sustainable. The provisions of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017, have not been contravened and there is no merit in the application forwarded by the Applicant No. 1 - application dismissed.
- 2019 (3) TMI 369 - NATIONAL ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
Profiteering - Auric City Homes - benefit of input tax credit not passed on - net additional benefit of ITC - contravention of Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017 - whether there has been any benefit of reduction in the rate of tax or ITC that needs to be passed on to the recipients by way of commensurate reduction in prices - Held that:- In the present case, the Respondent has availed benefit of additional ITC of 6.49% (post GST) as compared to 3.65% (pre-GST). Based on the data and the documents filed by the Respondent, this percentage has been rightly arrived at by the DGAP by taking into account the benefit of credit available during pre GST (April 2016 to June 2017) to the taxable turnover received during the said period. Similarly for the post GST period (01 07.2017 to 31.08.2018) the percentage of ITC has been arrived at by taking in....... + More
- 2019 (3) TMI 269 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Cancellation of registration - non filing of returns of returns - GSTR 3B returns have been filed upto December 2017 and GSTR-1 only UPTO August 2018 - Held that:- I consciously refrain from referring to details of the circulars as neither of the learned counsels is in a position to explain with clarity what the prevailing position is with regard to the extended/applicable time limit for submission of returns. Suffice it to say that the overall impression that I get is that the authorities, both Centre and State have taken into consideration the fact that Goods and Service Tax is nascent in its application and is an evolving regime - I am inclined to direct the Principal Secretary/Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Chennai, to consider and pass orders upon the application of the petitioner dated 18.12.2018 wherein the petitioner seeks leave to pay pending GST dues in six (6) monthly instalments - petition disposed off.
- 2019 (3) TMI 268 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Grant of conditional stay - Held that:- In the present case only notice has been issued. The learned Government Pleader submits that when a notice is issued, then there is a commencement of recovery proceedings. We would not deal with that issue as of now, since it gives a separate cause of action to the assessee. We direct the assessee to pay the short fall which has been suffered by the Department that is 2,95,000/- to the Department directly within a period of three weeks from today. The Revenue Recovery proceedings shall be kept in abeyance then. The recovery shall stand stayed until the disposal of the first appeal on such conditions being satisfied - Appeal allowed.
- 2019 (3) TMI 267 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Detention of goods - Validity of FORM GSTMOV-06 dated 04.02.2019 - Held that:- The detention/seizure is provided for only in cases where the Department is prima facie convinced that there is a contravention of the provisions of the Act and the Rules. The order of detention has to reflect the reasons for which the seizure of the conveyance/goods has been effected. A perusal of the impugned order reveals that none of the relevant fields have been ticked and almost all fields have been left blank. It is thus entirely unclear as to what statutory provision or Rule the petitioner has contravened. A pointed query put in this regard to the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents also elicits no details and he is also unable to enlighten the Court on what the contraventions might be - Admittedly, in the sworn ....... + More
- 2019 (3) TMI 168 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Maintainability of petition - Validity of order passed under Section 73 (9) of the U.P. GST Act, 2017 dated 21.1.2015 - appealable order under Section 107 of the U.P. GST Act or not? - Held that:- The order is appellable under Section 107 of the U.P. GST Act - In view of the statutory provision for appeal we are not inclined to entertain the petition at all. In appeal question of fact as well as law both can be considered and decided. Therefore, even if question of law is arising and there may not be any dispute of fact, still it is not proper to allow the petitioner to bye pass the statutory remedy. Appeal dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy.
- 2019 (3) TMI 149 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Application for stay of the impugned order - VAT paid under the pre-GST regime - claim for input tax credit - Held that:- As an interim arrangement, we direct the petitioner to deposit of ₹ 5,11,60,450/- with the respondent authorities within 3 weeks from today. On the deposit being made, the same would be converted into an interest bearing FDR for a period of nine months. The FDR amount and the interest accrued thereon would abide by further orders of this Court - It is made clear that this is only an interim arrangement and the Court has not expressed any firm and final view. List on 19.02.2019.
- 2019 (3) TMI 148 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, MAHARASHTRA
Maintainability of Advance Ruling application - applicable fee not paid - Circular No. 25/25/2017-GST - Held that:- It is mandatory as section 97(1) read with Rule 104 of the CGST/MGST Act to pay applicable fee of ₹ 5000/- each under SGST and CGST Act to be deposited as per the provision of Section 49 of the Act. If not the application would be treated as an incomplete application liable for rejection - In the instant case, applicant has deposited only a fee of ₹ 5000/- and not the full amount. As such application is incomplete and is liable for rejection - application for Advance Ruling rejected as being not maintainable.