Siddhabali Stone Gallery Vs State of Gujarat (Gujarat High Court) Considering the documents placed on record which reveal that the petitioner had paid the integrated goods and services tax on the goods in question at the time of import thereof as well as the fact that after the conveyance came to be intercepted, the petitioner […]
Manglesh Champaklal Gandhi Vs Aditya Birla Finance Ltd. (Gujarat High Court) It is clear that on reading the provisions of Section 13(4) of Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 with Rule 8 of Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002, the Court held that once possession notice is given under […]
Jakap Metind Pvt Ltd Vs Union of India (Gujarat High Court) In this case, it is not as if the petitioner has not filed FORM GST TRAN-1 within the time provided by the respondents under the rules. The petitioner had filed the form, but on account of not properly understanding the nature of the columns […]
Order of attachment of bank account is prima facie without authority of law, as discussed hereinabove, and the order of blocking of credit is not backed by any statutory provision, the respondents are directed to forthwith withdraw the attachment of the bank account of the petitioner with the IDBI Bank, Prahladnagar Branch bearing Current Account No. 1024102000009874 and to unblock the credit of Rs.6,63,51,380/- available in the electronic credit ledger forthwith.
Director of Income Tax (E) Vs Gujarat Cricket Association (Gujarat High Court) Merely because the Association puts up tickets of the international cricket matches for sale and earns some profit out of the same, it would not lose its character of having been established for a charitable purpose. It is also important to note that […]
India Logistics And Cargo Movers Vs The State of Gujarat (Gujarat High Court) It was incumbent upon the GST Department to give reasons in support of their conclusion that the goods in question and the conveyance are required to be confiscated. However, the impugned order is totally bereft of any reasons, in the absence of […]
Mohd. Sahil Jakir Vs State of Gujarat (Gujarat High Court) Referring to provisions of section 129 of the CGST Act, it was submitted that the same do not contemplate detention of goods on any ground other than the grounds stated therein and that, undervaluation of an invoice cannot be a ground for detention of goods […]
In the given case, the applicant is facing charges under Sections 132(1)(b) and 132(1)(c) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, for which maximum sentence is of five years. Hence the applicant wanted to apply for regular bail.
In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of allegations made against the applicant in the FIR and considering the admitted position that the applicant is arrested on 08.07.2019 and the fact that till date even after passage of 60 days, neither any complaint nor chargesheet is filed and therefore, the applicant would be entitled for default bail, without going into detail at this stage
A perusal of Section 94 shows that there is no power conferred upon the Central Government to make any Rules or Notifications for extraterritorial events; or in other words, for services rendered and consumed beyond the “taxable territory” i.e. beyond India. Obviously, the Act itself is not applicable to the territories other than India and therefore the Executives cannot have any power to make Rules for territories beyond India.
