Allahabad High Court

GST: Seized goods to be released on giving security equal to invoice value

M/S Akash Traders Vs State Of U.P. & 2 Others (Allahabad High Court)

M/S Akash Traders Vs State Of U.P. (Allahabad High Court) Heard Shri Praveen Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri C.B. Tripathi, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner to challenge the seizure order dated 30.12.2017 passed under Section 129(1) of U.P. GST Act (hereina...

Read More

Goods seized for wrong e-way bill date must be released on furnishing of security other than cash or bank guarantee

Pragati Enterprises Vs State of U.P. (Allahabad High Court)

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...

Read More

HC directs release of goods detained for non-availability of E-way bill considering other documents

Puneet Automobiles Ltd. Vs State of U.P. (Allahabad High Court)

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....

Read More

HC directs GSTN to issue password to assessee to complete migration process

M/S Metro Institutes Of Medical Sciences Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State Of U.P. & 5 Others (Allahabad High Court)

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...

Read More

GST: Seizure of goods for alleged intention to evade tax without opportunity to taxpayer to explain his conduct is invalid

M/s M.K. Enterprises v. State of U.P. & 3 Others (Allahabad High Court)

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 […]...

Read More

No Penalty for non / Late filing of GST Return due to technical issues: HC

Manu International Vs. State Of U.P. & 5 Others (Allahabad High Court)

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 […]...

Read More

HC allows manual filing of GST TRAN-1 as electronic system not responded

M/S National Chemical And Dyes Company, Vs. Union Of India (Allahabad High Court)

The petitioner has alleged in the petition that despite making several efforts on the last date for filing of the application, the electronic system of the respondent no.2 did not respond, as a result of which the petitioner is likely to suffer loss of the credit that it is entitled to by passage of time....

Read More

HC quashes order detaining goods for Non-accompaniment of E-way bill

M/S Modern Traders Vs. State Of U P And 2 Others (Allahabad High Court)

M/s. Modern Traders Vs. State Of U P And 2 Others (Allahabad High Court) The High Court Held that As e-way bill was produced on the same day of the interception of goods along with documents indicating payment of IGST but before seizure order is passed, no justification for passing orders of seizure of goods/vehicle […]...

Read More

Second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) must be read and given effect to retroactively

Principal CIT Vs M/S Manoj Kumar Singh (Allahabad High Court)

It is not disputed that section 40(a)(ia), Second proviso is for the benefit of the assessee and when a provision has been made in fiscal statute for benefit of assessee, in the absence of any express provision or a provision which by necessary implication gives a different impression, such provision which is beneficial to the assessee m...

Read More

‘Part B’ of GST e-way bill- not required if distance is less than 50 KM

Rivigo Services (P.) Ltd. Vs State of U.P. (Allahabad High Court)

Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is a registered company having its registered office at Gurugram, Haryana. The petitioner company is also registered under the GST Act, 2017 and is carrying on business of transportation of goods from one place to another. ...

Read More
Page 1 of 2512345...1020...Last »

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (3,782)
Company Law (3,948)
Custom Duty (6,991)
DGFT (3,707)
Excise Duty (4,144)
Fema / RBI (3,494)
Finance (3,686)
Income Tax (27,621)
SEBI (2,919)
Service Tax (3,371)