Gaurav Maheshwari Vs State of Rajasthan (Rajasthan High Court) High Court has decided to grant the bail to the petitioner who is allegedly guilty of creating bogus firms/companies solely for the purpose of fraudulently creating and issuing GST invoices without any sale/purchase and actual movement of goods. Further, the prevailing circumstances of complete lock-down amidst […]
The respondents are now directed to conduct reassessment proceedings by granting reasonable opportunity to the petitioner of cross-examination in respect of the documents pertaining to the Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Guna (M.P.).
Assessment Order passed by the Respondent under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act 2005 in AO No 207184 dated 17.04.2020 for the period 06/2014 to 03/2016 as illegal, arbitrary, bad in law without jurisdiction and bereft of any valid reasons violative of principles of natural justice and violative of Articles 14, 191g and 265 of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the same.
Shiv Agro Vs State of Gujarat (Gujarat High Court) For final decision regarding confiscation of goods and conveyance under GST, the applicant has to file statutory appeal under Section 107 of the G.S.T. Act before the appellate authority. Filing writ petition before court will not able to solve the issue since they will not interfere […]
Mohammed Arif Jameel Vs Union of India (Karnataka High Court) If there are complaints received by the State that some contractors or employers are confining the migrant workers to their shelters and are not permitting them to go to their respective home States, the State Government will have to attend to such complaints and will […]
A landmark judgement pronounced in the Delhi High Court on 05th May 2020 in the case of Bharti Airtel Ltd Vs. Union of India & Ors in Appeal W.P.(C) 6345/2018, CM APPL. 45505/2019. High Court allowed petitioner to rectify Form GSTR 3B for the period July 2017 to September 2017. Issue Covered: Rule 61(5), Form […]
Delhi High Court held that the failure of the Government to operationalise the statutory returns, GSTR 2, 2A and 3 prescribed under the CGST Act, cannot prejudice the assessee. The GSTR 3B which was merely a summary return as an alternative did not have the statutory features of the returns prescribed under the Act.
Rule 117 of CGST Rules is directory in nature, insofar as it prescribes the time-limit for transitioning of credit and therefore, the same would not result in the forfeiture of the rights, in case the credit is not availed within the period prescribed.
The issue under consideration is whether tribunal was correct in holding rental income received from Forum Mall should be considered as ‘Income from business’ and not ‘Income from house property’, though agreement between landlord and tenant contemplating relationship of landlord and tenant and as such it would partake character of rental income?
In other words, time limit has to be computed from the last date of the last month of the quarter which would be the relevant date for the purposes of examining if the claim is filed within the limitation prescribed under Section 11-B or otherwise.
