The petitioner is engaged in the business of manufacture of paper, paperboard in India with focus on recycled grades and specializes in the manufacture of duplex boards, kraft paper, writing and printing papers.
Gujarat High Court quashes VAT Tribunal’s pre-deposit order in Laxmi Dye Chem case, restoring revision applications for further proceedings.
In the impugned order it has been held that supply of free power is nothing but “consideration” towards licensing services rendered by the State Governments. The correctness of this view is assailed in the Writ Petition.
The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, impugning an order dated 13.04.2024 passed under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Delhi Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 for the financial year 2018-19.
Andhra Pradesh High Court held that continuation of order of attachment and Garnishee impermissible since petitioner has preferred an appeal against the assessment order and has paid 10% of the disputed tax as required under section 107 of the CGST Act.
The petitioners prays that directions be issued to the respondents to refund an amount of ₹22,00,000/-, which the petitioners claim that they were coerced to deposit during the course of search conducted by the respondents.
Madras High Court held that matter regarding denial of Input Tax Credit (ITC) u/s. 16(4) of the CGST Act is remanded back in terms of Clauses 114 and 146 of the Finance (No.2) Bill, 2024 and enacted in the Finance Act, 2024.
Madras High Court held that imposition of interest for belated filing of GSTR-3B return without affording sufficient opportunity is unjustifiable and hence the order set aside and matter is remanded back for fresh consideration.
Madras High Court held that issuance of two different orders for same Assessment Year is passed without application of mind and in violation of the principles of natural justice. Thus, order set aside and matter remanded back.
Gauhati High Court held that Explanation inserted to section 14A vide the Finance Act, 2022 is applicable prospectively and order holding that the said insertion is clarificatory and hence retrospective in nature is erroneous.
