Join us on 8th Dec for a live webinar on GST and corporate guarantees. Learn valuation, co-guarantor liability, cross-border impacts, and practical examples.
Simplify GST learning with memory techniques. Join live sessions, master CGST sections, and retain knowledge effortlessly. Register now for practical GST mastery!
From April 1, a large number of Indians will see significant changes in their financial life. April 1 is the first day of the new financial year, 2018-19. The Budget proposals for the new financial year, announced on February 1, will come into force from today itself. Below are the key changes which are going to […]
Outward transport service used by the manufactures for transportation of finished goods from the place of removal up to the premises of the purchaser is covered within the definition of input service provided in rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.
In terms of Article 279A of the Constitution of India, it cannot be said that the recommendations made by the Goods and Services Tax Council are in violation of the Code of Conduct.
Petitioner made representations stating that the contract works for which the agreements were executed prior to 01.07.2017 GST cannot be imposed and 2% VAT alone is applicable.
Petitioner has challenged second proviso to sub-section (1) of section 140 of the Gujarat goods and service tax act, 2017 under which certain restrictions have been imposed on a dealer for taking tax credit under then the VAT act. counsel for the petitioner submitted that the provision deprives a dealer to his vested right and thus, the statute acts retrospectively and also imposes an unreasonable restriction.
The other ground of seizure on which penalty has been imposed is that the goods, started their journey one week after the date of the invoice. Prima facie that cannot be the ground to seize the goods or to impose penalty.
Petitioner seeks release of the goods detained by the second respondent under Section 129 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act as also the Kerala State Goods and Services Tax Act.
The goods of the petitioner have been seized on 16.03.2018 for want of E-Way Bill. On the respective submissions of the parties the issue which crops up in this petition is whether Rule 138 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) as it stood originally before the 4th amendment would stand revived with the rescinding of the notifications dated 30/31.01.2018 enforcing the amended Rule 138 of the Rules w.e.f. 01.02.2018 with regard to the E-Way Bill.
The question raised in the present petition concerns Rule 96A of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 and Circular No. 4/4/2017- GST issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs (GST Policy Wing), in terms of which any person exporting goods or services without payment of integrated tax is required to furnish a bond or a letter of undertaking (‘LUT’) in Form GST RFD-11.
With the enactment of the Finance Act, 2018, CBEC is renamed as the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC). The change was necessitated due to enactment of the Goods and Services Tax (GST) which has consolidated the multiple Indirect Taxes into one tax.
