Allahabad High Court held that once the registration is granted, the same could be cancelled only in terms of the conditions prescribed under Section 29(2) and allegedly being a bogus firm is not a ground enumerated under Section 29(2) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
Delhi High Court held that rule 89(4) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 applies only in case of zero rated supply of goods or services, without payment of tax under bond or letter of undertaking. Accordingly, provisions are inapplicable to cases of refund of integrated tax paid on zero rated supply.
Kerala High Court held that as the nature of the land of the petitioner has been permitted to be changed pursuant to passing of a statutory order under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967, the competent authority is bound to re-assess the rate of Basic Tax in respect of the land
Kerala High Court held that there cannot be an automatic demand for property tax without fixing the tax payable in accordance with the procedure provided in the Act and the Rules. Accordingly, demand of property tax without assessment of the property is untenable in law.
Madras High Court set aside the orders calling upon the petitioner to remit arrears of property tax as no notice was issued prior to passing order of re-assessment under section 137B of the Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act.
Calcutta High Court’s examination of Gurbux Singh Gupta Vs State of West Bengal scrutinizes GST Act enforcement, focusing on a vehicle’s seizure under Section 129. The case debates documentation validity and penalty imposition, emphasizing procedural adherence and legal interpretations within GST’s framework.
Allahabad High Court in Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad vs. CESTAT, allows revival of appeal before CESTAT subject to payment of Pre-Deposit
Explore the Calcutta High Courts ruling in Paarabhu Dayal Jajoo vs Deputy Commissioner, dismissing a writ petition on grounds of alternative remedy under the GST Act and violation of natural justice principles.
High Court held that the Order of Appellate Authority allowing refund to assessee cannot be ignored solely because Revenue decided to challenge the order allowing refund, directed the Revenue to disburse refund along with interest and clarified that Revenue is not precluded from availing any remedy and in case Revenue succeeds they would be entitled to recovery the amount disbursed.
Gujarat High Court directed the petitioner to furnish their reply as second show cause notice already issued by the department containing the reasons for cancellation of GST registration.
