TATA Hitachi Construction Machinery Company Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Karnataka (Karnataka High Court) The issue under consideration is whether Tribunal was correct in rejecting the C-Forms submitted by the petitioner and hence denying statutory benefits? The Appellate Tribunal at the threshold has rejected the declaration forms on the ground...

Kambay Aromatics Vs Union of India (Gujarat High Court) It appears that if the petitioner could not upload the form GST TRAN­1 due to technical glitches and in spite of various representations made by the petitioner, he was not allowed to upload the form GST TRAN­1. In view of the settled legal position as stated […]...

Assessee should upload the form GST TRAN1 within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of the writ of this order as the delay was due to technical glitches in the GST portal....

Qatalys Software Technologies Private Limited Vs Union of India (Madras High Court) Revenue is right in contending that Section 234 (E) of the Act is not a penalty. Penalty is levied under Section 271 (H) and is not automatic. Penalty is levied only when tax is deducted at source along with interest fee is not deposited […]...

High Court observed that as per the definition of ISD under Section 2(61) of CGST Act and facts of the present case, it is not possible for a supplier of goods and services to file a refund application to claim refund of input tax credit distributed by ISD....

Assessee-sole proprietor was not eligible for a tax deduction for his own education expenses as the same could not be treated as business expenses and the point in time when the expenditure was incurred, the business of the assessee was not set up. ...

Shakti Hormann Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Hyderabad) We find that the assessee is not benefitting in any way by not filing the appeal in time before the Tribunal. The assessee has explained the reasons as misplacement of papers by one of the office staff. This is one of the possible reasons for not being […]...

Darsh Pharmachem Pvt. Ltd. Vs Superintendent, Central GST (Gujarat High Court) The writ-applicant is engaged in the business of manufacturing of pharmaceutical products. As provided under Section 140 of the CGST Act, 2017, the writ applicant tried to upload Form TRAN-1 for the purpose of claiming the ITC credit on-line. However on account...

Siddhi Developers vs Union of India (Gujarat High Court) It appears that if the petitioner could not upload the form GST TRAN­1 due to technical glitches and in spite of various representations made by the petitioner, he was not allowed to upload the form GST TRAN­1. In view of the settled legal position as stated […]...

Jupudi Venkateswara Rao Vs ITO (ITAT Visakhapatnam) Ld.CIT(A) has given a clear finding that the assessee failed to produce the purchases book, stock register etc to verify the purchases or the unaccounted sales, the assessee has taken a different stand before the ITAT and argued that the difference was not related to purchase and sales [...