Home Case Index All Cases GST This

Law	-- All -- GST Income Tax Benami Property Customs Corporate Laws Securities / SEBI Insolvency & Bankruptcy FEMA Law of Competition PMLA Service Tax Central Excise CST, VAT & Sales Tax Wealth tax Indian Laws
Court	-- Any -- Supreme Court SC Orders / Highlights High Court Appellate Tribunal Tribunal Appellate authority for Advance Ruling Advance Ruling Authority National Financial Reporting Authority Competition Commission of India ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY Commission Central Government Board DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court Commissioner / Appellate Authority Other
Citation	--Year-- 2024 2023 2022 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 1990 1989 1988 1987 1986 1985 1984 1983 1982 1981 1980 1979 1978 1977 1976 1975 1974 1973 1972 1971 1970 1969 1968 1967 1966 1965 1964 1963 1962 1961 1960 1959 1958 1957 1956 1955 1954 1953 1952 1951 1950 Upto 1949 - -Volume- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 -
Landmark	Nil - N/A Referred in >= 3 Cases Referred in >= 4 Cases Referred in >= 5 Cases Referred in >= 10 Cases Referred in >= 15 Cases Referred in >= 25 Cases Referred in >= 50 Cases Referred in >= 100 Cases
Order by	TMI Citation Date of Decision

Advanced Search Options

GST - Case Laws

Showing 401 to 420 of 13886 Records

• 2024 (10) TMI 1237
  

  Violation of principles of natural justice - SCN and other communications were uploaded in the “view additional notices and orders” tab in the GST portal and not communicated to the petitioner through any other mode - petitioner submits that the petitioner is in a position to explain each defect confirmed in the impugned order, if provided an opportunity - HELD THAT:- On examining the impugned order, it is evident that the tax proposals were confirmed because the petitioner did not file a written objection to the show cause notice or attend the personal hearing. In view of the assertion that such non participation was on account of not being aware of proceedings, the interest of justice warrants reconsideration subject to putting the petitioner on terms.

  The impugned order dated 28.12.2023 is set on condition that the petitioner remits 10% of the disputed tax demand, as agreed to, with in fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. With in the said period, the petitioner is permitted to submit a reply to the show cause notice - petition disposed off.

  ---

• 2024 (10) TMI 1236
  
  The High Court of Gujarat heard a case regarding the classification of lease as a supply of services or a sale of land under the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner argued that the activity should not be taxed as a supply of services. The court issued a notice returnable on July 3, 2024, and granted ad-interim relief. The case will be heard with other related matters.

  ---

• 2024 (10) TMI 1235
  

  Condonation of delay in filing the revocation application - compliance with all the requirements of paying the taxes, interest, late fee, penalty etc. due - HELD THAT:- The delay in Petitioner’s invoking the proviso to Rule 23 of the Odisha Goods and Services Tax Rules (OGST Rules) is condoned and it is directed that subject to the Petitioner depositing all the taxes, interest, late fee, penalty etc. due and complying with other formalities, the Petitioner’s application for revocation will be considered in accordance with law.

  Petition disposed off.

  ---

• 2024 (10) TMI 1234
  

  Condonation of delay in filing the revocation application - compliance with all the requirements of paying the taxes, interest, late fee, penalty etc. due - HELD THAT:- The delay in Petitioner’s invoking the proviso to Rule 23 of the Odisha Goods and Services Tax Rules (OGST Rules) is condoned and it is directed that subject to the Petitioner depositing all the taxes, interest, late fee, penalty etc. due and complying with other formalities, the Petitioner’s application for revocation will be considered in accordance with law.

  Petition disposed off.

  ---

• 2024 (10) TMI 1233
  

  Violation of principles of natural justice - it is submitted that the impugned order is vitiated by non-consideration of material documents filed by the petitioner - HELD THAT:- The reply dated 24.01.2024 from the petitioner clearly indicates that six volumes of documents containing several material documents such as purchase orders, tax invoices, e-way bills, weighment slips, bank statements, etc. were submitted by the petitioner. Although the impugned order contains a discussion on the e-way bills, there is no discussion on the other documents submitted by the petitioner. No reason is contained in the impugned order for rejecting such documents or for concluding that such documents were fabricated. Therefore, the matter requires reconsideration.

  In order to protect revenue interest to an extent, it is necessary to put the petitioner on terms. On instructions, learned counsel for the petitioner agrees that the petitioner would remit 5% of the disputed tax demand, as a condition for remand.

  The impugned order dated 02.04.2024 is set aside on condition that the petitioner remits 5% of the disputed tax demand as agreed to with in two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioner is also permitted to submit an additional reply within the said period - Petition disposed off.

  ---

• 2024 (10) TMI 1232
  

  Violation of principles of natural justice - petitioner did not have a reasonable opportunity to contest the tax demand on merits - inadvertent error while filing GSTR 3B returns - HELD THAT:- On examining the impugned order, it is evident that the tax proposal related to non payment of RCM. By taking into account the assertion that such tax proposal arose out of an inadvertent error as also the assertion that the petitioner could not participate in proceedings because the petitioner was unaware of such proceedings, the interest of justice warrants re-consideration by putting the petitioner on terms.

  The impugned order dated 26.12.2023 is set aside on condition that the petitioner remits 10% of the disputed tax demand with in two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. With in the said period, the petitioner is permitted to submit a reply to the show cause notice - petition disposed off.

  ---

• 2024 (10) TMI 1231
  

  Legality and validity of the impugned notice as well as impugned order of confiscation issued by the respondent authority under Section 130 of the Central Goods & Service Tax Act, 2017 - detention of vehicle and the goods under Section 129 of the GST Act - HELD THAT:- Issue Notice, returnable on 31st July, 2024. To be heard with Special Civil Application No.8353 of 2022.

  By way of ad-interim relief, goods and conveyance which are detained by the respondent authority shall be released on the condition that 'The goods and conveyance shall be released on payment of Rs. 03,28,446/- by the petitioner and submission of bond of the value of Rs. 32,84,454/-.'

  ---

• 2024 (10) TMI 1230
  

  Condonation of delay in filing appeal - only ground on which the impugned order has been passed is that the appeal was filed beyond the time limit prescribed under Section 117 of the TNGST Act, 2017 - Cancellation of GST Registrations - returns not filed for a continuous period of 6 months - Section 29 of the TNGST Act, 2017 r/w Rule 22 of TNGST Rules - HELD THAT:- The issue involved in this Writ Petition is squarely covered by the decision of this Court rendered in TVL. SUGUNA CUTPIECE CENTER VERSUS THE APPELLATE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (ST) (GST) , THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (CIRCLE) , SALEM BAZAAR. [2022 (2) TMI 933 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] where it was held that 'The petitioners are directed to file their returns for the period prior to the cancellation of registration, if such returns have not been already filed, together with tax defaulted which has not been paid prior to cancellation along with interest for such belated payment of tax and fine and fee fixed for belated filing of returns for the defaulted period under the provisions of the Act, within a period of forty five (45) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, if it has not been already paid.'

  The impugned order passed by the second respondent, dated 15.02.2023, is set aside. The petitioner is directed to comply with the above requirements. Subject to the petitioner complying with the above requirements, the registration of the petitioner shall be restored - Petition allowed.

  ---

• 2024 (10) TMI 1229
  

  Waiver of interest and penalty - Challenge to demand made by Annexure-P1 series which is dated 02.12.2021 - HELD THAT:- The petitioner admittedly did not file any appeal from the above order and now the same is time barred. The petitioner’s contention is that as of now there is some waiver of interest and penalty insofar as the subject assessment year, as decided by the GST Council. If the same is applicable, the petitioner would have to first approach the Assessing Authority with the orders of the GST Council and it is not for the petitioner to seek the remedy under Article 226 peremptorily.

  The writ petition would stand rejected without any observations on the claim of waiver, which the petitioner would have to convince the Assessing Authority if the same is avoidable.

  ---

• 2024 (10) TMI 1228
  

  Exemption from service tax - contention of the petitioner is that the petitioner engages only in government contracts which is exempted from the levy of service tax - HELD THAT:- The question of whether the various contracts entered into by the petitioner is covered under the exemption notification is a question both on facts and law which has to be agitated before the appellate authority.

  Petition dismissed.

  ---

• 2024 (10) TMI 1227
  

  Legality and validity of the impugned notice issued by the respondent authority under Section 130 of the Goods & Service Tax Act, 2017 - detention of vehicle and the goods under Section 129 of the GST Act - HELD THAT:- Issue Notice, returnable on 31st July, 2024. To be heard with Special Civil Application No.8353 of 2024.

  By way of ad-interim relief, goods and conveyance which are detained by the respondent authority shall be released on the condition that 'The goods and conveyance shall be released on payment of Rs. 13,68,438/- by the petitioner and submission of bond of the value of Rs. 38,01,216/-.'

  ---

• 2024 (10) TMI 1226
  

  Violation of principles justice - petitioner's reply was not taken into consideration while arriving at the tax liability - mismatch between the GSTR 3B returns and the auto populated GSTR 2A - HELD THAT:- On examining the impugned order, it is evident that the petitioner's reply was construed as vague and not trustworthy because the petitioner failed to submit documents to reconcile the mismatch. However, the assessing officer did not take into consideration the RCM adjustment referred to by the petitioner. Therefore, re-consideration is warranted in the interest of justice by putting the petitioner on terms.

  The impugned order dated 31.10.2023 is set aside on condition that the petitioner remits 10% of the disputed tax demand with in fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. With in the said period, the petitioner is permitted to submit an additional reply along with relevant documents - petition disposed off.

  ---

• 2024 (10) TMI 1225
  

  Violation of principles of natural justice - petitioner did not have a reasonable opportunity to contest the tax demand on merits - HELD THAT:- On examining the impugned order, it is evident that the tax proposal was arrived at on best judgment basis because the petitioner did not respond to the notice or appear at the personal hearing. Since the petitioner was not heard before the order was issued and the petitioner asserts that he was unaware of proceedings, the interest of justice warrants reconsideration albeit by putting the petitioner on terms.

  The impugned order dated 15.12.2022 is set aside on condition that the petitioner remits 10% of the disputed tax demand within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. With in such period, the petitioner is permitted to reply to the notice - Petition disposed off.

  ---

• 2024 (10) TMI 1224
  

  Time Limitation - Rejection of appeal on the ground that it was filed beyond the period of limitation - mismatch between the petitioner's GSTR 3B return and the GSTR 1 statement - HELD THAT:- On examining the order in original, it is evident that the tax proposal related to a mismatch between the petitioner's GSTR 3B return and the GSTR 1 statement. Such tax proposal was confirmed because the petitioner did not reply to the show cause notice or appear at the personal hearing. In the affidavit in support of this writ petition, the petitioner has stated that he is a small dealer in optical devices and was unable to monitor the portal especially in view of his son's kidney ailment.

  In these facts and circumstances, albeit by putting the petitioner on terms, it is just and appropriate that the petitioner be provided an opportunity to contest the tax demand on merits.

  Petition is disposed of without any order as to costs by setting aside the order in original dated 24.08.2023 and remanding the matter to the 2nd respondent for reconsideration. This is subject to the petitioner remitting an additional 5% of the disputed tax demand.

  ---

• 2024 (10) TMI 1223
  

  Breach of principles of natural justice - GST compliances had been entrusted to a consultant and that such consultant did not inform the petitioner about proceedings culminating in the impugned order - mismatch between the petitioner's GSTR 3B returns and the auto populated GSTR 2A - HELD THAT:- On examining the impugned order, it is evident that the tax proposal was confirmed because the petitioner did not reply to the show cause notice or attend the personal hearing. By taking note of the assertion that the petitioner could not participate in proceedings on account of not being aware of the same, the interest of justice warrants that an opportunity be provided to the petitioner to contest the tax demand on merits.

  The petitioner stated that a sum of Rs. 4,09,604.87/- was appropriated from the bank account and the bank statement has been placed on record to substantiate such contention. Subject to verification of this appropriation, revenue interest stands secured to that extent.

  The impugned order dated 12.12.2023 is set aside subject to verification that a sum of Rs. 4,09,604.87/- was appropriated from the petitioner's bank account towards the tax demand under the impugned order. If not, the petitioner shall remit 10% of the disputed tax demand with in two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order - petition disposed off.

  ---

• 2024 (10) TMI 1222
  

  Violation of principles of natural justice - sufficient opportunity was not provided to the petitioner to contest the tax proposal on merits - tax liability imposed in respect of the mismatch between the petitioner’s GSTR 3B return and the auto populated GSTR - HELD THAT:- The petitioner’s reply dated 11.12.2023 is on record. Apart from referring to circular No.183 and pointing out that GSTR 2A was notified by circular issued on 11.11.2019, no other documents were enclosed with such reply. The tax proposal was confirmed in such circumstances. Since learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in a position to establish that only eligible ITC was claimed, the interest of justice warrants that another opportunity be provided to the petitioner by putting the petitioner on terms.

  The impugned order dated 31.12.2023 is set aside on condition that the petitioner remits 15% of the disputed tax demand within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Within the said period, the petitioner is permitted to submit additional documents, if any - petition disposed off.

  ---

• 2024 (10) TMI 1221
  

  Challenge to impugned orders passed under Section 73 of the TNGST Act, 2017 - non-service of SCN - case of the petitioner is that although intimation in DRC-01A and DRC 01 was issued, DRC-01 did not accompany any show cause notice - Violation of principles of natural justice - HELD THAT:- Having considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents, it is evident that the impugned orders have been passed in violation of principles of natural justice.

  Considering the same, the impugned orders are quashed and the same shall be treated as addendum to the notice in DRC-01. The petitioner shall file a reply to the same with in a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is expected that the respondent will complete the proceeding with in a period of 3 months thereafter.

  Petition allowed.

  ---

• 2024 (10) TMI 1220
  

  Violation of principles of natural justice - petitioner did not have a reasonable opportunity to contest the tax demand on merits - alleged mismatch between the petitioner's GSTR 3B returns and the auto populated GSTR 2A - HELD THAT:- On examining the impugned order, it is evident that the tax proposal pertains to a mismatch between the petitioner's GSTR 3B returns and the auto populated GSTR 2A. Such tax proposal was confirmed because the petitioner did not respond to any of the notices. Since the petitioner asserts that she could not respond on account of not being aware of proceedings, the interest of justice warrants that the petitioner be provided an opportunity to contest the tax demand on merits albeit by putting the petitioner on terms.

  On instructions, learned counsel for the petitioner agrees to remit 10% of the disputed tax demand as a condition for remand. He makes a request that the sum of Rs. 31,433/- paid by him may be adjusted and that he would make good the shortfall.

  The impugned order dated 05.10.2023 is set aside on condition that the petitioner remits, in the aggregate, 10% of the disputed tax demand after taking into consideration any remittance previously made in that regard. Such remittance shall be made with in two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order - petition disposed off.

  ---

• 2024 (10) TMI 1219
  

  Maintainability of appeal - requirement of pre-deposit - HELD THAT:- Being satisfied with the reasons stated and stated in the affidavit in support of the present case and also medical records enclosed along with this Writ Petition, this Court is inclined to exercise the discretion in favour of the petitioner to file an appeal within a period of 15 days from today as ordered subject to the petitioner depositing 25% of the disputed tax towards pre-deposit.

  In case along with aforesaid appeal and the said deposit, the petitioner approaches the first respondent, the appeal shall be entertained and disposed of on merits and in accordance with law without any reference to the limitation - Petition disposed off.

  ---

• 2024 (10) TMI 1218
  

  Breach of principles of natural justice - service of SCN - impugned order and notices preceding such order were uploaded on the “View Additional Notices and Orders” tab on the GST portal and not communicated to the petitioner through any other mode - mismatch between the petitioner's GSTR 3B returns and the auto-populated GSTR 2A - HELD THAT:- On examining the impugned order, it is evident that each tax proposal dealt with therein was confirmed because the petitioner did not file a reply to the show cause notice. Since it is asserted that the petitioner could not participate in proceedings because of being unaware of proceedings, the interest of justice warrants that the petitioner be provided an opportunity to contest the tax demand on merits after putting the petitioner on terms.

  The impugned order dated 27.12.2023 is set aside on condition that the petitioner remits 10% of the disputed tax demand within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. With in the said period, the petitioner is permitted to submit a reply to the show cause notice - Petition disposed off.

  ---

1 ....171819202122232425........ 695