Court: GSTAT Delhi Date of Order: 2018-10-11
During the course of hearing Ms Rinki Arora, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant has submitted that interim order dated 9.10.2015 on the issue in hand, has been passed by Hon’ble High Court of Bhopal in Writ Petition No. 7573 of 2013. In further order dated 12.1.2016, Hon’ble High Court has ordered to keep the above interim order in continuation. Since now nearly 3 years has been passed, the status of the above writ petition need to be checked whether the matter is still pending before Hon’ble High Court or has acquired finality.
Court: High Court of Andhra Pradesh Date of Order: 2018-10-18
In all these writ petitions seizure orders and notices issued under sections 129 (1) and (3), respectively, by various authorities, mainly on the ground that E-Way Bill-01 under U.P. Goods and Service Tax Act 2017 (hereinafter referred to as U.P.G.S.T ACT) read with Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act 2017 (hereinafter referred to as I.G.S.T. Act 2017) and Rules framed thereunder were not accompanied by Transporters when goods were intercepted within State of U.P. during Intra State or Inter State transportation, have been challenged on the ground that there is no requirement of accompanying said E-Way Bill; provisions of Provincial Statute cannot override provisions of Central Statue and, in any case, omission is only indeliberate and unintentional. (I) Writ Tax No. 587 of 2018
Court: High Court of Madras Date of Order: 2018-09-10
This writ petition has been filed seeking a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents either to re-open and reinstate the facility of online submission of TRAN 1 to the petitioner or manually accept the hard copy of TRAN 1 of the petitioner and allow the duty credit of Rs.50,50,050/- to the petitioner towards the stock held as on 30.06.2017 in respect of liability of GST received by the petitioner.
Court: High Court of Madhya Pradesh Date of Order: 2018-08-23
According to the petitioner, M. P. State Government or officials authorized under the MPGST Act, 2017 have no jurisdiction to exercise the powers under the Integrated Goods and Services Act, 2017 (in short "the IGST Act, 2017), particularly under Section 4 of the IGST Act, 2017.
Court: High Court of Madras Date of Order: 2018-08-21
Mrs.R.Hemalatha, learned Senior Standing Counsel takes notice for the respondents 3 & 4. Mr.V.Sundareswaran, learned Senior Panel Counsel takes notice for the respondents 1 & 2. Mr.J.Kumaran, learned Government Advocate (P) takes notice for the fifth respondent. By consent of the parties, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.
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.