Goods & Services Tax
GST Case Laws

Search GST Case Laws

Keyword

Authority

Court

Section

Appeal No.

Date of Order

Date of Order

Judge

Favouring

Login/Subscribe to get access. Plan starts from Rs. 3500/-  Subscribe Now

Court: GSTAT Delhi Date of Order: 2018-06-27

Present is an Appeal against the Order of Commissioner (Appeals) dated 29.11.2017, denying the appellant the availment of cenvat credit on supplementary invoices issued by Northern Coalfields Limited, supplier of coal to the appellant, levying excise duty on royalty & stowing charges.


Court: GSTAT Allahabad Date of Order: 2018-06-26

On matter being called, neither anybody appeared nor is there any request for adjournment, in spite of the notice having been sent well in advance to the appellant. Accordingly, we have heard the ld. D. R. appearing for the Revenue and have gone through the application for condonation of delay.


Court: GSTAT Hyderabad Date of Order: 2018-06-26

This application is filed seeking condonation of delay of 30 days in filing the appeal. It was explained that the delay in filing was caused on account of the sudden death of the father of the consultant dealing with the case and she could not attend the office. As a result, the delay was caused. Considering the delay has been satisfactorily explained, I condone the delay.


Court: GSTAT Allahabad Date of Order: 2018-06-25

Early hearing stands filed on the ground that the issue as involved is recurring in nature as also the director of the company has since expired and the other directors want restructuring of business after settlement of Government dues including service tax liability.


Court: GSTAT Hyderabad Date of Order: 2018-06-25

Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that in identical cases with respect to 45 earlier appeals, the Division Bench of Hyderabad had, vide Final Order No. A/30284-30328/2017 remanded the matters back to the Original Authority to resolve the issue by scrutiny of documentary evidence for ascertainment of claim of appellant that they had not retained the tax collected from its customers. She therefore, prays that this case may also be remanded accordingly.


Court: GSTAT Delhi Date of Order: 2018-06-22

From these four orders passed by the same Commissioner - LTU, Mumbai, about seven appeals have been filed by Revenue. Out of seven appeals, one appeal have been already transferred of the year 2014 (filed at the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal) related to the same issue. Accordingly, both the parties are submitting that the balance Appeals, which were filed before Mumbai Bench of this Tribunal, are relating to the same issue. The subject issue is one and the same, as four identical orders are subject matter of these appeals. The two appeals before this Bench, of the year 2018, relate to the consequential refund.


Court: GSTAT Delhi Date of Order: 2018-06-18

Delay is condoned for the reasons mentioned in the application. CoD is allowed.


Court: GSTAT Chennai Date of Order: 2018-06-14

On behalf of the appellants, the Ld. Counsel, Shri J. Shankarraman submitted that the Director of the Company, who is looking after the business is 70 years old and is a chronic diabetic and heart patient and his health becomes critical from time to time and needs medical care. Due to his health condition the appeal could not be filed in time and this caused a delay of 156 days in preferring the above appeal. He further submitted that the delay is neither willful nor wanton but it has happened beyond the control of the appellants in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and pleaded that the delay may be condoned.


Court: GSTAT Chennai Date of Order: 2018-06-14

On behalf of the appellants, the Ld. Consultant, Shri A. Balagopal submitted that on receipt of the order passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals-I), the appellants have instructed the dealing assistant to contact the consultant appointed to deal with the case immediately and to do the needful to prefer an appeal. But, without knowing the seriousness of the matter, the concerned official has misplaced the order and also failed to bring it to the notice of the consultant or the Director. When the Central Excise authorities insisted for payment of arrears based on the impugned order, the appellants took every effort to trace out the order and finally, it was traced on 27.11.2017 and then immediately contacted the consultant to prepare the appeal papers. The appeal was finally filed on 04.12.2017 along with this application for condonation of delay, which caused a delay of 557 days in preferring the above appeal. He further submitted that the delay is neither willful nor wanton but it has happened beyond the control of the appellants in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and pleaded that the delay may be condoned.


Court: GSTAT Allahabad Date of Order: 2018-06-13

On perusal of the application along with the enclosed certificates issued by consultant Orthopedic surgeons, it is clear that the appellant was unwell which caused delay in filing appeal. The reasons for delay is explained satisfactorily. Therefore delay is condoned. In above terms the Miscellaneous Application is allowed