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

5,409 rulings

  1. AAR · 08 Jan 2021
    If the deposit is non-refundable, or any outstanding sum of amount against supply made to customer can be adjusted from this deposit, then such deposit will be taxable.

    In the application of Capital Commercial Co-op. (Service) Society Ltd.

    (2021) TaxCorp(IDT) 4539 (AAR)

  2. AAR · 08 Jan 2021
    Rendering of the service of refining old gold jewellery or coins/biscuit as well as testing of purity of gold is Mixed Supply as per section 2(74) of the CGST Act with GST rate at 18%.

    In the matter Uday Laxman Jhadav

    (2021) TaxCorp(IDT) 4538 (AAR)

  3. Allahabad High Court · 08 Jan 2021
    Any proceeding on the same subject matter means any proceeding on the same cause of action and for the same dispute involving some adjudication proceedings which may include assessment proceedings, proceedings for penalties etc., proceedings for demands and recovery under Sections 73 and 74 etc.

    G.K. Trading Company vs. UOI & 4 Ors.

    (2021) TaxCorp(IDT) 4537 (HC-ALLAHABAD)

  4. Gujarat High Court · 08 Jan 2021
    Order of attachment of immovable properties of the Company as well as the Directors of the Company has been challenged before the Court in a Special Civil Application.

    Superfine Impex Pvt. Ltd. vs. UOI

    (2021) TaxCorp(IDT) 4536 (HC-GUJARAT)

  5. Gujarat High Court · 08 Jan 2021
    The condition for provisional attachment enumerated in Valerius Industries has not been fulfilled in the instant case, and hence, removal of attachment of the five bank accounts in writ applicant’s favour is directed.

    TS-1155-HC-2020(GUJ)-NT-JAY AMBEY FILAMENT PVT LTD

    (2021) TaxCorp(IDT) 4535 (HC-GUJARAT)

  6. Gujarat High Court · 08 Jan 2021
    The refund was not being paid for the reason that the assessee had inadvertently mentioned the drawback claim under column-A instead of column-B.

    Aniket Exports vs. UOI

    (2021) TaxCorp(IDT) 4534 (HC-GUJARAT)

  7. Madras High Court · 08 Jan 2021
    When Rule 92(3) of the CGST Rules, 2017, makes it clear that hearing is mandatory before rejecting any application for refund, the Assessing Authority as well as the Appellate Authority, in their respective orders, have arbitrarily and by total non application of mind to the said Rule.

    World Home Textiles Inc vs Addl. Commissioner (Appeals)

    (2021) TaxCorp(IDT) 4533 (HC-MADRAS)

  8. Karnataka High Court · 07 Jan 2021
    It cannot be held that provisions of Section 130 of the Act could be invoked in cases of conveyance/goods detained/seized while in transit only if there is failure to pay the amount of tax and penalty as provided under section 129(6) of the Act.

    M.S. Meghdoot Logistics vs. Commercial Tax Officer

    (2021) TaxCorp(IDT) 4530 (HC-KARNATAKA)

  9. Rajasthan High Court · 06 Jan 2021
    GST Council is directed to issue necessary recommendation to the Commissioner to enable the Assessee to get the benefit of CENVAT credit within the stipulated time as stipulated by the Union of India.

    Sunil Kumar & Company vs. Union of India

    (2021) TaxCorp(IDT) 4526 (HC-RAJASTHAN)

  10. Gujarat High Court · 06 Jan 2021
    As such, the blockage of the credit ledger and the impugned order cannot be sustained.

    Aryan Tradelink vs. The Union of India

    (2021) TaxCorp(IDT) 4525 (HC-GUJARAT)

  11. Allahabad High Court · 06 Jan 2021
    Assessee had deposited the amount of tax and penalty, despite which an order in FORM GST DRC07 was received by it showing the demand details.

    Libra International Limited vs. Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Tax and Anr.

    (2021) TaxCorp(IDT) 4524 (HC-ALLAHABAD)

  12. Kerala High Court · 06 Jan 2021
    The detention in question cannot be said to be unjustified.

    K.M. Oil Industries vs. Assistant State Tax Officer

    (2021) TaxCorp(IDT) 4523 (HC-KERALA)

  13. Karnataka High Court · 06 Jan 2021
    Rule 86A of the CGST Rules mandates that the Commissioner or Officer who is authorized, can block credit ledger if he has reasons to believe that any of the circumstances enumerated under the Rules exist and that such officer must record reasons, and highlighting that in present case no reasons have been assigned.

    Aryan Tradelink vs. The Union of India

    (2021) TaxCorp(IDT) 4522 (HC-KARNATAKA)

  14. HP High Court · 05 Jan 2021
    When a statutory form is created by law for redressal of grievance, a writ petition should not be entertained ignoring the statutory dispensation.

    Radha Krishan Industries vs. State of H.P. and Others

    (2021) TaxCorp(IDT) 4519 (HC-HP)

  15. Anti-profiteering Authority · 04 Jan 2021
    DGAP’s claim that MRF had not passed the benefit of tax reduction by increasing the base price in the post reduction period, is contrary to its clarification and is required to explain the contradiction made in its Reports.

    DGAP vs. MRF Corp. Ltd.

    (2021) TaxCorp(IDT) 4516 (NAA)

  16. Anti-profiteering Authority · 01 Jan 2021
    Since no penalty provisions were in existence when the violation was committed, therefore penalty cannot be imposed retrospectively.

    DGAP vs. Aster Infrahome Pvt. Ltd.

    (2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 4513 (NAA)

  17. Anti-profiteering Authority · 01 Jan 2021
    Since no penalty provisions were in existence when the Respondent had violated the provisions of Section 171(1), the penalty cannot be imposed on the Respondent retrospectively.

    DGAP vs. Sharma Trading Company

    (2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 4512 (NAA)

  18. Bombay High Court · 31 Dec 2020
    Merely because there is a proceeding under section 67 would not mean that recourse to such a drastic power as under section 83 would be an automatic consequence, more so when the petitioner has cooperated with the investigation.

    AJE India Pvt Ltd vs. UOI

    (2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 4511 (HC-BOMBAY)

  19. AAR · 30 Dec 2020
    The work awarded is in respect of civil works of a Small Hydro Electric Project in the existing dam and hence, can’t be considered as civil work for canal, dam or other irrigation works to be eligible for concessional rate of tax under the said entry.

    In the matter of R.S. Development & Construction Pvt. Ltd.

    (2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 4509 (AAR)

  20. Gujarat High Court · 30 Dec 2020
    Revenue is directed to immediately sanction the refund towards the IGST paid in respect to the goods exported i.e. Zero Rated Supplies made vide the shipping bills.

    Awadkrupa Plastomech Pvt. Ltd. vs. UOI

    (2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 4508 (HC-GUJARAT)

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.