The petitioner has ought to quash the seizure order dated 05.01.2018 which has been passed against the petitioner on the allegation that there was some wrong declaration on the date in the E-way Bill. The petitioner states that it had been written down inadvertently. Other than that no other allegation has been made against the petition...

These appeals are filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) challenging the orders dated 17.03.2017 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bengaluru, in ITA No.613/Bang/2014 and ITA No.614/Bang/2014...

E-Way Bill has been made applicable under the Central GST with effect from 1st February, 2018 and was not in place on the date of seizure though the State of U.P. alone has made a provision for the E-Way Bill earlier but that was not applicable to the State of Jharkhand from where the said loader/tipper had started journey....

Revenue is in appeal against the judgment of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Rajkot Bench dated 28th August 2017, raising the following question for our consideration ...

Heard Sri Rahul Agarwal assisted by Sri Varad Nath and Miss. Archi Agarwal learned counsels for the petitioner. Sri V.K.S. Raghuvanshi, appeared for the respondent no.4, Sri C.B. Tripathi for the respondent nos.1 and 5 and Sri Arvind Kumar Kushwaha holding the brief of Sri Prem Shankar Prasad, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 3 and...

Jindal Dye chem Industries (P) Ltd. Vs Union of India ((Delhi High Court) It is apparent from these facts that the imports which are the  subject matter of the present writ petition were in fact made after the  introduction of GST Regime. The petitioner is the beneficiary of an advance license issued on 17.07.2017. At that […]...

M/s M.K. Enterprises  v. State of U.P. & 3 Others (Allahabad High Court) Assessee was not given any opportunity to show cause or give reply to the allegation on which goods had been seized on account of absence of Transit Declaration Form (TDF), it was held that as the petitioner had no notice or opportunity […]...

Manu International Vs. State of U.P. (Allahabad High Court) Penalty should not be imposed where the assessee is unable to file the GST returns and pay the taxes for technical issues relating to migration. The petitioner is a registered partnership firm under the U.P. VAT Act, 2008. On the enforcement of the GST, it applied […]...

Natthani Infrastructures Vs State of Chhattisgarh (Chhattisgarh High Court) 1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that petitioner has made an application on 05.04.2018 before the respondent authorities for reimbursement of additional Goods and Services Tax (GST) liability on civil contract and work order issued pri...

Declaration made by the petitioner under the Voluntary Compliance Encouragement Scheme, 2013 has been rejected in terms of the order impugned in the writ petition on the ground that they have not submitted the amended declaration in accordance with the procedure prescribed in Circular No. 170/5/2013-ST dated 8.8.2013. As per the said circ...