Search
Advanced Search Search with field filters
/adv
Navigation
Home Go to homepage
/home
Direct Tax Income Tax resources
GST GST Acts, Rules & Case Laws
Company Law Companies Act & SEBI
Due Date Tracker Statutory compliance deadlines
/due
Due Date Calendar Calendar view of compliance deadlines
Daily Digest Today's tax updates and articles
/digest
Landmark Rulings

GST landmark rulings

5,404 rulings

  1. Allahabad High Court · 15 May 2023
    Amount deposited by the assessee shall be refunded subject to the outcome of the demand quantified under Section 74 of the Act in accordance with law.

    Maa Mahamaya Alloys Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of U.P. & 3 Ors.

    (2023) TaxCorp(IDT) 7528 (HC-ALLAHABAD)

  2. Karnataka High Court · 12 May 2023
    The terms betting and gambling appearing in Entry 6 of Schedule III of the CGST Act does not and cannot include games of skill within its ambit.

    Gameskraft Technologies Pvt Ltd vs DGGSTI

    (2023) TaxCorp(IDT) 7524 (HC-KARNATAKA)

  3. AP High Court · 10 May 2023
    Since at that stage no action was contemplated to inspect the premises of the assessee or to search and seize any goods or books of accounts as contemplated under Section 67 of the Act. As such, no authorization is required by the V&E Department Officer.

    Sudhakar Traders vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh

    (2023) TaxCorp(IDT) 7520 (HC-AP)

  4. AAR · 09 May 2023
    A lump sum paid by ITC Ltd. to be paid as bonus to employees of the Canteen Service Provider would be taxable at the same rate as supply of canteen service i.e. 5%.

    In the matter of Foodsutra Art Of Spices Pvt. Ltd.

    (2023) TaxCorp(IDT) 7515 (AAR)

  5. Madras High Court · 09 May 2023
    If at all the assessing officer is unsatisfied with the attribution adopted by assessee, he is always at liberty to seek more particulars or apply the deeming fiction as per the Notification.

    Avigna Properties Pvt. Ltd. Vs State Tax Officer

    (2023) TaxCorp(IDT) 7514 (HC-MADRAS)

  6. AAR · 09 May 2023
    Provision of accommodation by the Applicant to pilgrims of Temple not within the precincts of temple and not managed by the temple’s trust with a rent of Rs.1000 or more is not exempt but taxable at 12%.

    In the matter of Nandini Ashram Trust

    (2023) TaxCorp(IDT) 7513 (AAR)

  7. Calcutta High Court · 08 May 2023
    In the diary recovered by the Special Investigation Branch, it was noticed that the assessee had received much more advance than it was shown in the returns.

    Jalsa Resorts vs. State of U.P.

    (2023) TaxCorp(IDT) 7507 (HC-CALCUTTA)

  8. Rajasthan High Court · 08 May 2023
    Further proceedings pursuant to impugned show cause notice shall remain in abeyance.

    Surajmal Ramniwas Oil Mill Pvt. Ltd. vs. Joint Commissioner, SGST & Ors.

    (2023) TaxCorp(IDT) 7506 (HC-RAJASTHAN)

  9. Rajasthan High Court · 08 May 2023
    Petitioner-firm, shall be entitled to lodge its claim for availment of Input Tax Credit in respect of the period from the cancellation of the registration till the registration is restored.

    R.K. Jewelers vs. UOI

    (2023) TaxCorp(IDT) 7505 (HC-RAJASTHAN)

  10. Calcutta High Court · 08 May 2023
    One more opportunity can be granted to the assessee to produce proof to show that he is a registered government contractor.

    Mohammad Sikandar Ali vs Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, Siliguri Charge And Ors.

    (2023) TaxCorp(IDT) 7504 (HC-CALCUTTA)

  11. Karnataka High Court · 08 May 2023
    The petitioner must first submit an application as contemplated under the aforesaid Notification, and the concerned must offer reasons to justify rejection of the application, even if it could be rejected.

    Varadaraju Ravi Kumar vs. Joint Commissioner of Central Tax

    (2023) TaxCorp(IDT) 7503 (HC-KARNATAKA)

  12. Madras High Court · 08 May 2023
    Non-filing of certified copy of the impugned order within 7 days of filing of appeal u/s 107 of TNGST Act is only a technical defect and merit of the matters in the Appeal should not have been sacrificed for non compliance of a procedural requirement.

    PKV Agencies vs The Appellate Deputy Commissioner

    (2023) TaxCorp(IDT) 7502 (HC-MADRAS)

  13. Orissa High Court · 08 May 2023
    The requirement to furnish certified copy of the impugned order within seven days of filing of appeal is provided as a procedural requirement.

    Atlas PVC Pipes Ltd vs. State of Odisha and others

    (2023) TaxCorp(IDT) 7501 (HC-ORISSA)

  14. AAR · 05 May 2023
    Prima facie the applicant has obtained an Advance Ruling by suppression of this material fact and hence the advance ruling needs to be withdrawn as void ab initio u/s 104 of the CGST Act, 2017.

    In the matter of Srico Projects Pvt. Ltd.

    (2023) TaxCorp(IDT) 7495 (AAR)

  15. AAR · 05 May 2023
    If the Applicant provides sub-contract of pure services to another contractor of SMC, the supply would not fall within the ambit of Notification and would be leviable to GST.

    In the matter of Ajit Babubhai Jariwala

    (2023) TaxCorp(IDT) 7494 (AAR)

  16. AAR · 05 May 2023
    Works contract services to Government Authority taxable at 12%, others 18%

    In the matter of Srico Projects Pvt. Ltd.

    (2023) TaxCorp(IDT) 7493 (AAR)

  17. AAR · 04 May 2023
    Inter-state supply of Motor vehicles in the form of 7-seater Ambulances to Tripura Govt. attracts 28% IGST under the HSN Code 8703.

    In the matter of Raminfo Ltd.

    (2023) TaxCorp(IDT) 7489 (AAR)

  18. AAR · 04 May 2023
    The subject goods are not a structure or part of a structure, but are in the form of sheets of various measurements and requires cutting, routing, drilling, etc as per use therefore, they are not prepared for use in structure hence not classifiable under CETH 7610.

    In the matter of Aludecor Lamination Pvt Ltd

    (2023) TaxCorp(IDT) 7488 (AAR)

  19. Allahabad High Court · 03 May 2023
    An appeal against any decision or order passed under this Act by the adjudicating authority, may be filed before appellate authority within the prescribed period of 3 months from the date on which the said order is communicated to the person concerned.

    Ram Ply Product vs Additional Commissioner

    (2023) TaxCorp(IDT) 7482 (HC-ALLAHABAD)

  20. Madras High Court · 03 May 2023
    GSTR-01 only deals with details and hence would not constitute a statutory return as unacceptable and contrary to the scheme of the Act.

    K.I. International (India) Ltd. vs. The Principal Secretary

    (2023) TaxCorp(IDT) 7481 (HC-MADRAS)

Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.


An unhandled error has occurred. Reload ×

Rejoining the server...

Rejoin failed... trying again in seconds.

Failed to rejoin.
Please retry or reload the page.

The session has been paused by the server.

Failed to resume the session.
Please retry or reload the page.