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 Chennai Date of Order: 2018-10-10

None present for the appellant. After hearing the ld. AR, I find that the reason given by the appellant is satisfactory. The delay being nominal is condoned and the miscellaneous application for condoning the delay is allowed. Registry to list the appeal for hearing in its turn.


Court: GSTAT Chennai Date of Order: 2018-10-08

After hearing both sides, I find that the reason given by the appellant is satisfactory. The delay being nominal is condoned and the miscellaneous applications for condoning the delay are allowed. Registry to list the appeals for hearing in its turn.


Court: GSTAT Allahabad Date of Order: 2018-10-05

The case has been called out but no one has appeared on behalf of the appellant, though Shri Gyanendra Kumar Tripathi, learned Authorized Representative for the Revenue is present.


Court: GSTAT Hyderabad Date of Order: 2018-10-05

After considering the submissions made and perusal of appeal records, I find that the delay has been suitably justified. Accordingly, I allow the application for condonation of delay and direct the Registry to take on record the appeal and list the same for disposal in its due course.


Court: GSTAT Chennai Date of Order: 2018-10-04

After hearing both sides, I find that the delay has occurred for the reason that the appellant was preoccupied with finalizing of books of accounts and submission of Income Tax returns etc. After the introduction of GST, the assessees are indeed being put to a position of handling GST as well as legacy issues. Therefore, I find that the delay occurred has to be condoned. However, the delay being of 218 days, I am of the view that the appellant has to be put to cost. I direct the appellant to deposit Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) within a period of one month from today. Failure to comply with such direction shall result in dismissal of COD application along with the appeal. Compliance to be reported on 5.11.2018.


Court: GSTAT Chennai Date of Order: 2018-10-03

On behalf of the applicant, Shri S. Ramachandran, ld. consultant appeared and argued the matter. He submitted that on the date of hearing of appeal i.e. 10.10.2016, the appellant or the consultant could not appear before the Tribunal for the reason that it was Saraswathi Pooja festival day, and was a working day in that calendar year. For such reason, the appellant could not appear and argue the matter. However, the Tribunal took up the matter for disposal in the absence of the appellant / representative. Thus, he argued that the appellant could not forth his argument before the Bench and therefore requested for restoring the appeal and rehear the same.


Court: GSTAT Mumbai Date of Order: 2018-10-01

There is delay of 85 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. The reason for delay is satisfactorily explained. Accordingly, the application for condonation of delay is allowed.


Court: High Court of Kerala Date of Order: 2018-08-09

A trader, an assessee under the new tax regime (GST), wants to carry goods (timber) inter-state. The vehicle intercepted on the route, it faces detention—and a possible confiscation—proceedings. It has not uploaded or carried with it a completed e-way bill: Part B is incomplete. After receiving a notice, the trader replied, and then received an order: the detaining officer demanded tax and penalty under the law. Aggrieved, the trader questioned the detention and the concomitant proceedings.


Court: High Court of Bombay Date of Order: 2018-08-06

By the Deed of Trust dated 27th June, 2009, the settlor, inter-alia, declared and agreed that the Trustee Company shall manage the mutual fund in accordance with the applicable regulations. Further, as per para 6.1.1 of the Deed of Trust dated 27th June, 2009, the Trustee Company is allowed to float one or more schemes for the issue of units to be subscribed by the public.


Court: High Court of Bombay Date of Order: 2018-07-26

Mr. Sonpal, learned advocate submits that the prayers in the writ petition have become infructuous as subsequently the assessment order is passed and petitioner has filed an appeal against the said assessment order.