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

5,419 rulings

  1. AAR · 19 May 2020
    The questions sought by the applicant cannot be answered in terms of section 97(2) of the CGST Act as they are outside the purview of said section, refuses to admit the application u/s 98(2).

    In the matter of Thinklab Edusoft LLP

    (2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3681 (AAR)

  2. AAR · 19 May 2020
    Withdrawal of application for advance ruling filed seeking appropriate tax rate on parts/accessories of Sprinklers and Drip Irrigation System sold in isolation is considered.

    In the matter of Arihant Plast

    (2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3680 (AAR)

  3. AAR · 18 May 2020
    Discussions in the GST Council meeting though not controlling, has a persuasive value.

    In the matter of Rich Dairy Products (India) Pvt. Ltd.

    (2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3676 (AAR)

  4. AAR · 18 May 2020
    One cannot be influenced by extraneous factors while determining a person’s eligibility to an exemption notification.

    In the matter of Nursery Men Cooperative Society Ltd

    (2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3675 (AAR)

  5. Delhi High Court · 20 Mar 2020
    Assessee has already reversed unutilized ITC of Rs. 7 crores and the supporting documents substantiating the said claim was duly submitted before NAA. Unutilized ITC cannot be considered as a benefit.

    Sarvapriya Securities Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India & Ors.

    (2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3671 (HC-DELHI)

  6. Kerala High Court · 20 Mar 2020
    Most taxes are paid online without human to human contact and hence there is no legal rationale for the HC to pass such broad omnibus directions.

    Suo Moto Vs High Court

    (2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3670 (HC-KERALA)

  7. Anti-profiteering Authority · 13 Mar 2020
    Principles of determination of injury, evidence of dumping and calculation of non-injurious price which have been provided under the Customs Tariff Rules cannot be applied in case of anti-profiteering provisions as the fundamentals and basics of both are entirely different.

    Mr. Rahul Sharma and DGAP vs. McNROE Consumer Products Pvt. Ltd.

    (2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3656 (NAA)

  8. Calcutta High Court · 12 Mar 2020
    Assessees transitioning into a new procedure set out under the GST regime are bound to face complications and in some cases may be completely unable to carry out the new procedure.

    Rishi Graphics Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India & Ors.

    (2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3653 (HC-CALCUTTA)

  9. Madras High Court · 12 Mar 2020
    Section 83 requires an order of attachment to be passed only by the Commissioner, in writing.

    Darshan Comtrade Pvt. Ltd. vs. Principal Chief Commissioner of GST & Central Excise

    (2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3652 (HC-MADRAS) · Section 83

  10. Delhi High Court · 12 Mar 2020
    The period of 7 days prescribed in Rule 159(5) is a directory and not a mandatory period in order to file objection for attachment of property.

    RR India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India and Ors.

    (2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3651 (HC-DELHI)

  11. AAR · 11 Mar 2020
    Activity of development of land under joint development agreement entered into with landowners cannot be classified under Para 5 of Schedule III (sale of land). It constitutes a supply of service.

    In the matter of Vidit Builders

    (2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3650 (AAR)

  12. Kerala High Court · 11 Mar 2020
    In the instant case the jurisdictional fact regarding the six months' continuous default on the part of the assessee was certainly fulfilled at the time of issuance of show cause notice, but vital requirement of jurisdictional fact was non-existent as on the date of issuance of cancellation order.

    Phoenix Rubbers vs. The Commercial Tax Officer & Ors.

    (2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3649 (HC-KERALA)

  13. Kerala High Court · 11 Mar 2020
    The charging provisions must be construed strictly but not the machinery provisions which would be construed like any other statute.

    Daily Fresh Fruits India Private Limited vs. Assistant State Tax Officer

    (2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3648 (HC-KERALA)

  14. AAR · 11 Mar 2020
    Applicant is engaged in construction of building/warehouse which is an immovable property which falls under exclusion of section 17 (5) (d) of the CGST Act, 2017.

    In the matter of Unity Traders

    (2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3647 (AAR)

  15. AAR · 10 Mar 2020
    The supply of equipment and materials for Sub-stations, Feeder Bays and Transmission Lines under contract of construction of new 33/220 kV Pooling substation with transmission lines on Turnkey basis shall not be included in the value of works contract for civil work for Sub-station and Feeder Bay.

    In the matter of Vihan Enterprises

    (2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3644 (AAR)

  16. AAR · 10 Mar 2020
    The NKDA Act provides for constitution of Development Funds and all amount received by NKDA including grant from State Govt. would be credited to such fund.

    In the matter of Newtown Kolkata Development Authority

    (2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3643 (AAR)

  17. AAR · 09 Mar 2020
    The Govt. of Madhya Pradesh is having full control over the applicant and therefore, the applicant is covered under the definition of Govt. entity.

    In the matter of Madhya Pradesh Paschim Kshetra Vidyut Vitran Co. Ltd.

    (2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3642 (AAR)

  18. AAR · 09 Mar 2020
    Applicant had not provided any evidence to prove that the said product Bio Processed Meal is meant for animal feed for it to fall under Chapter heading 23099090 which is exclusively for animal feed.

    In the matter of Vippy Industries Ltd.

    (2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3641 (AAR)

  19. AAR · 09 Mar 2020
    Eligibility under Sl. No. 3 of the Exemption Notification is to be examined from three aspects: (1) whether the supply being made is pure Service/ Composite supply (2) whether the recipient is government, local authority and (3) whether the supply is being made in relation to any function entrusted to a panchayat or a municipality under the Constitution.

    In the matter of Dipak Kanti Mazumder Dynamic Engineers

    (2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3640 (AAR)

  20. AAR · 09 Mar 2020
    The printing service is a principal supply and the place at which the printed booklets are delivered qualifies as the place of supply of the composite printing service.

    In the matter of Swapna Printing Works Private Limited

    (2020) TaxCorp(IDT) 3639 (AAR)

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.