High Court held that by prescribing the formula in Sub-rule 5 of Rule 89 of the CGGST Rules,2017 to exclude refund of tax paid on ‘input service’ as part of the refund of unutilised input tax credit is contrary to the provisions of Sub-section 3 of Section 54 of the CGST Act,2017 which provides for claim of refund of ‘any unutilised input tax credit’.
. Conjoint reading of Section 2(6) and 2(13), which defines export of service and intermediary service respectively, then the person who is intermediary cannot be considered as exporter of services because he is only a broker who arranges and facilitate the supply of goods or services or both.
The issue under consideration is whether the addition made by AO u/s 14A with respect of Interest free funds is justified in law?
State of Gujarat Vs Advanced Systek Private Limited (Gujarat High Court) It appears that when the assessee has sold the goods on the price, which is inclusive of tax, the turnover is to be calculated as per the formula provided in Section 8A of the CST. In the facts of the case the rate of CST applicable for the […]
The issue under consideration is whether prosecution u/s 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act can be levied for dishonour of a cheque on cheque having difference in the amount in figures and words?
Rajasthan High Court Grants Interim Relief To J.K. Cement Ltd. From Being Exposed To High Tax Demand Under Rajasthan Vat Act And Central Sales Tax Act.
It is held by the honourable Kerala High Court that the petitioner, who is an assessee under the GST Act, is not disputing his liability to tax, or the quantum thereof, for the period in question. It only seeks an installment facility to pay the admitted tax, together with interest thereon, in view of the financial difficulties faced by it during the Covid pandemic situation, when its business has come to a total standstill.
Kiran Choubey W/O Shri Narendra Choubey Vs State of Gujarat (Gujarat High Court) It appears that final order in Form MOV-11 has been passed. Thus, the truck has been ordered to be confiscated under the provisions of Section 130 of the CGST Act 2017. As a final order of confiscation has been passed and the […]
Due to COVID-19 pandemic high court approves that Patanjali can deposits the amount of penalty in question in the consumer welfare fund in six monthly installments.
Uflix Industries Vs Union of India & Ors. (Delhi High Court) Present writ petition has been filed challenging the attachment orders dated 18th March, 2020 and 10th June, 2020 passed by respondent no. 3 attaching the bank account of the Petitioner on the grounds that they have been issued without jurisdiction as well as authority […]
