Jindal Pipes Limited Vs State Of U.P. (Allahabad High Court) It had been admitted that order was served upon the driver and, therefore, the order was neither served on the consignee nor on the consignor. Learned counsel relied upon a judgment of this Court reported in 2019 (21) GSTN 145 : S/S. Patel Hardware vs. […]
Ajai Kumar Singh Khaldelial Vs PCIT (Allahabad High Court) In the present case, the question which arises for consideration is that in case, cash is deposited directly in the bank account of the beneficiary, can the benefit of Rule 6DD(c)(v) of the Rules, 1962, can be given to the assessee. Such transaction by depositing cash […]
Allahabad High Court held thaty there is no provision which empowers ROC to de-activate DIN, only on the ground that a Director has incurred disqualification under Section 164(2) (a) or his Office has become vacant under Section 167(1) (a). It also quashes List of disqualified directors published by ROC in public gazette.
In the present case a provision has been made in Section 109 for creation of the GST, Appellate Tribunal, but the reasons best known to the respondents only for the State of U.P. said Appellate Tribunal has not been constituted.
AK Overseas Vs. State of U.P. & Ors. (Allahabad High Court) The Petitioner has filed the writ petition to release the seized goods which are seized under Rule 140 of the Central Goods and Services Rules, 2017. High Court states that, in case the petitioner fulfills the requirement of Rule 140 together with its explanation, […]
High Court states that if the petitioner fulfills the requirement of Rule 140 together with its explanation, Authorised GST officer will release his vehicle along with the goods within period of one week.
Shaurya Enterprises Vs State of U.P. (Allahabad High Court) It has been observed that till March 31, 2018 it was not mandatory to download the e-way bill from the official website and the said requirement was effective from 1st April, 2018. In this case the e-way bill which was downloaded and submitted on 10.12.2017 at […]
Makkhan Singh Vs Shyam Singh And 3 Others (Allahabad High Court) CPC-Constructive notice, held not sufficient-‘Willful disobedience’ to be proved beyond doubt-Court not to proceed on surmises or inferences As regards the contention raised on behalf of the plaintiff/petitioners with regard to presumption of service of notice in a case of a notice sent by […]
A conjoint reading of the Rule 117 and 120A of CGST Rules, 2017clearly reveals that every registered person who has submitted a declaration electronically in FORM G.S.T. T.R.A.N-1 within the period specified in Rule 117 or Rule 118 or Rule 119 or Rule 120 is allowed to revise such declaration once and submit the revised declaration in FORM G.S.T. T.R.A.N-1 electronically on the common portal,
S.D. Traders Vs CIT (Allahabad High Court) It has been argued by the counsel for the Revenue that CIT (A) has not travelled beyond the books of accounts and during appeal it was found that only confirmation was available of five parties and the rest of the creditors were untraceable, hence the addition of the […]
