-
Once The provisions of Rule 117 of the CGST Rules, which prescribe limitation has been upheld, the plea raised pertaining to the denial of vested right on account of petitioners failing to submit/file Form GST Tran-1 in time cannot be countenanced.
Shree Motors vs. UOI
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3707 (HC-RAJASTHAN)
-
Glass partitions are not permanently attached to earth but fixed to earth with nuts & bolts, They can be dismantled and moved according to the requirements of the clients of the Appellant, hence, do not qualify as immovable property.
In the matter of WeWork India Management Private Limited
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3687 (AAR)
-
Import in present case took place before GST implementation when the quotation was provided to Applicant, therefore, Respondent would have suffered CVD @12.5% and SAD @ 4% at the time of import, while refund of SAD would have been available, CVD would have become an embedded part of cost of product in said quotation.
DGAP vs. Printing Machine Solutions
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3686 (NAA)
-
DGAP has computed base prices in respect of all the 68 dimension wise units of the product being sold by the Respondent and compared their commensurate prices with actual sale prices post rate reduction, holds same to be reasonable, appropriate and accurate.
DGAP vs. Litecon Industries Pvt Ltd
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3685 (NAA)
-
Two grounds raised by the department for the purpose of confiscation of the goods i.e. (i) non-generation of the e-way bill and (ii) under-valuation is observed. Matter is remitted for fresh consideration, so far as the issue of confiscation is concerned.
Sri Krishna Traders vs. State of Gujarat
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3684 (HC-GUJARAT)
-
The Petitioner is entitled to seek benefit of Order No.01/2020 dated Feb 07, 2020 which provides for extension of time-limit for submitting the declaration in FORM GST TRAN-01 under Rule 117 (1A) of CGST Rules till March 31, 2020.
Darsh Pharmachem Pvt. Ltd. vs. Superintendent, Central GST
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3683 (HC-GUJARAT)
-
Petitioner shall be required to appear before that Court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.
Gaurav vs. State
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3682 (HC-RAJASTHAN)
-
The questions sought by the applicant cannot be answered in terms of section 97(2) of the CGST Act as they are outside the purview of said section, refuses to admit the application u/s 98(2).
In the matter of Thinklab Edusoft LLP
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3681 (AAR)
-
Withdrawal of application for advance ruling filed seeking appropriate tax rate on parts/accessories of Sprinklers and Drip Irrigation System sold in isolation is considered.
In the matter of Arihant Plast
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3680 (AAR)
-
Discussions in the GST Council meeting though not controlling, has a persuasive value.
In the matter of Rich Dairy Products (India) Pvt. Ltd.
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3676 (AAR)
-
One cannot be influenced by extraneous factors while determining a person’s eligibility to an exemption notification.
In the matter of Nursery Men Cooperative Society Ltd
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3675 (AAR)
-
Assessee has already reversed unutilized ITC of Rs. 7 crores and the supporting documents substantiating the said claim was duly submitted before NAA. Unutilized ITC cannot be considered as a benefit.
Sarvapriya Securities Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India & Ors.
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3671 (HC-DELHI)
-
Most taxes are paid online without human to human contact and hence there is no legal rationale for the HC to pass such broad omnibus directions.
Suo Moto Vs High Court
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3670 (HC-KERALA)
-
Principles of determination of injury, evidence of dumping and calculation of non-injurious price which have been provided under the Customs Tariff Rules cannot be applied in case of anti-profiteering provisions as the fundamentals and basics of both are entirely different.
Mr. Rahul Sharma and DGAP vs. McNROE Consumer Products Pvt. Ltd.
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3656 (NAA)
-
Assessees transitioning into a new procedure set out under the GST regime are bound to face complications and in some cases may be completely unable to carry out the new procedure.
Rishi Graphics Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India & Ors.
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3653 (HC-CALCUTTA)
-
Section 83 requires an order of attachment to be passed only by the Commissioner, in writing.
Darshan Comtrade Pvt. Ltd. vs. Principal Chief Commissioner of GST & Central Excise
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3652 (HC-MADRAS) · Section 83
-
The period of 7 days prescribed in Rule 159(5) is a directory and not a mandatory period in order to file objection for attachment of property.
RR India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India and Ors.
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3651 (HC-DELHI)
-
Activity of development of land under joint development agreement entered into with landowners cannot be classified under Para 5 of Schedule III (sale of land). It constitutes a supply of service.
In the matter of Vidit Builders
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3650 (AAR)
-
In the instant case the jurisdictional fact regarding the six months' continuous default on the part of the assessee was certainly fulfilled at the time of issuance of show cause notice, but vital requirement of jurisdictional fact was non-existent as on the date of issuance of cancellation order.
Phoenix Rubbers vs. The Commercial Tax Officer & Ors.
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3649 (HC-KERALA)
-
The charging provisions must be construed strictly but not the machinery provisions which would be construed like any other statute.
Daily Fresh Fruits India Private Limited vs. Assistant State Tax Officer
(2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3648 (HC-KERALA)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.