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: 2018-10-03

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.


Court: High Court of Kerala Date of Order: 2018-07-13

The petitioner, a registered dealer under the Central Goods & Service Tax Act, 2017 & State Goods & Service Tax Act, 2017, faced detention proceedings against its goods. Having invited Ext.P10 proceedings under Section 129(3) of the CGST Act, the petitioner approached this Court assailing those proceedings.


Court: High Court of Kerala Date of Order: 2018-05-15

A consignment of marble, granite slabs and tiles that was being transported at the instance of the petitioner was detained by the respondent. Ext.P3 is the detention notice issued to the petitioner under Section 129(3) of the CGST/SGST Act, 2017. It is the case of the petitioner that the defect indicated in Ext.P3 notice is only a technical one, and therefore ought not to have been a reason for detaining the goods especially when it was not proved that there was any attempt at evasion of tax by the petitioner.


Court: GSTAT Mumbai Date of Order: 2018-09-28

The contention of the appellant, as found from the appeal memo, is that it failed to obtain temporary code from the Jurisdictional Central Tax & Excise authorities at Goa to deposit the appeal fee that attributed to the cause of delay. During the course of hearing of the Condonation of Delay application, ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that they raised the bank draft in a wrong name that contributed to the cause of delay.


Court: GSTAT Delhi Date of Order: 2018-09-25

Present Order disposes off an application praying for  rectification of mistake for Final Order dated 11.01.2018. It is  submitted that the appellant is manufacturing certain tablets,  capsules, syrups, ointments, etc and is availing area based  exemption under Notification No. 50/2003 dated 10.06.2003.  For the purpose, two conditions have to be fulfilled. First, the  unit has to be established in the geographical area mentioned in the Notification. Secondly, the unit has to manufacture  those excisable goods which are not prohibited in the  Notification that too under declaration to the Department. In  the present case, the first clearance of goods was made by the  appellant on 30.12.2009 in terms of the said Notification.  However, due to inadvertence, the applicant did not file the  declaration with the respondent Department. But, he  voluntarily filed the declaration on 30.05.2013 alongwith the  returns declaring the date of exercising option as 21.11.2009,  i.e. the date when applicant unit commenced commercial  production as a new unit. 


Court: GSTAT Delhi Date of Order: 2018-09-25

The appellant has filed the present appeal for condonation of 23 days delay. The appellant is absent on call. Heard the ld. AR for Revenue and perused the record. In the condonation application, it is stated that the appellant had received the impugned order on 5th April, 2018 and accordingly the due date was on or about 4th July 2018 wherein the appeal is filed on 27th July 2018.