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: 2019-01-08

The limitation for filing appeal is expiring on 9th June 2017, the appellant is located at Jaipur, Rajasthan and dispatch the appeal on 8th June 2017, by speed post which were received in this Tribunal on 12th June 2017. In this matter the delay in transit of 2-3 days is condoned and COD is allowed.


Court: GSTAT Delhi Date of Order: 2019-01-07

The ld. AR Shri Jagan Babu appeared on behalf of the  department. He submitted that the Tribunal has considered the issue  in detail in the final order and has rightly disallowed the credit on  outdoor catering service. The Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case  of Wipro Ltd. (supra) had analyzed the issue whether credit availed  on outdoor catering service after 1.4.2011 is eligible or not. It was  held by the Larger Bench that the said services are excluded from the  definition of input service. Therefore, the Tribunal has rightly  disallowed the credit. Further, the decision of the jurisdictional High  Court in Ganesan Builders (supra) is with regard to insurance service  and not with regard to outdoor catering service. That as per judicial propriety, the decision of the Larger Bench will prevail for the reason  that it squarely covers the issue on outdoor catering service.


Court: GSTAT Kolkata Date of Order: 2019-01-02

The appellant has filed an application for condoning the delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. The Order-in-Appeal dated 14/11/2017 has been received by the appellant on 22/11/2017 and accordingly, they were required to file the appeal before the Tribunal on or before 21/02/2018. However, the appeal was filed belatedly only on 22/05/2018 after delay of 89 days.


Court: GSTAT Chennai Date of Order: 2019-01-02

He draws our attention to the copy of the letter with the date  stamp of 07.06.2018 of the Registry of CESTAT, Chennai. It is noted  that the said letter seeks adjournment for the reason that the Ld.  Consultant for the appellant was out of the country. Ld. Consultant  submits that the adjournment letter may not have been placed  before the Bench and in consequence, the appeal was dismissed for  non-prosecution.


Court: GSTAT Delhi Date of Order: 2019-01-02

A notice was sent to the Respondent on 23 October, 2018 fixing 02 January, 2019 as the date of hearing. Today, neither the Respondent nor any counsel has appeared on their behalf. In the interest of justice, matter is adjourned to 19 February, 2019.


Court: GSTAT Delhi Date of Order: 2019-01-02

A notice was sent to the Appellants by Speed Post on 29 October, 2018 fixing 02 January, 2019 as the date for hearing. However, no one has appeared for the Appellants. In the interest of justice, we adjourn the matter to 07 February, 2019.


Court: GSTAT Delhi Date of Order: 2019-01-02

A notice was sent to the Respondent on 23 October, 2018 fixing 02 January, 2019 as the date of hearing. Today, neither the Respondent nor any counsel has appeared on their behalf. In the interest of justice, matter is adjourned to 19 February, 2019.


Court: GSTAT Chennai   Date of Order: 2019-01-01

On behalf of the appellant, ld. counsel Ms. Rachna submitted that the General Manager (Finance) who received the impugned order left the company and after searching the old records in September, 2018, the appellants were able to file the appeal with a delay of 176 days. She submitted that there are no willful latches on the part of the appellant in filing the appeal.


Court: GSTAT Delhi   Date of Order: 2019-01-01

An application seeking Condonation of delay in filing this appeal has been filed. In view of the averments made in the application and the submissions advanced by the learned Counsel of the appellant, we are satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from preferring the appeal within the stipulated time. Accordingly, we deem it proper to condone the delay in filing the appeal. However, in the facts and circumstances, we deem it proper to impose a cost of Rs.2,500/- (Rupees Two thousand and five hundred only) which shall be deposited in the Prime Minister’s relief fund within a period of one month.


Court: GSTAT Delhi   Date of Order: 2018-12-28

As the delay in presenting the present Appeal is only of 13 days, I hereby condone the same and allow the COD Application.