Kerala High Court held that there is no need for issuance of separate notification for cross-empowerment for authorising state GST officials as proper officer for the purpose CGST Act. Accordingly, writ disposed of.
Kerala High Court held that time limit for furnishing GST return under section 39 for the month of September is to be treated as 30th November in each financial year with effect from 01.07.2017. ITC to be claimed accordingly.
Kerala High Court quashes ₹9.4 crore GST penalty for denying cross-examination, emphasizing natural justice. Case highlights procedural lapses under GST law.
These writ petitions are filed by distributors of LPG appointed by the 1st respondent herein challenging orders imposing penalty, appellate orders, as also the Marketing Discipline Guidelines, 2018 under which the penalty is imposed.
Kerala High Court held that the time limit for furnishing the return for the month of September is to be treated as 30th November in each financial year with effect from 01.07.2017. Thus, claim for Input Tax Credit to be processed accordingly.
Kerala High Court held that there is no provision in Section 130 of the Goods and Services Tax Act which prohibits the interim release of goods which are detained pending finalization of proceedings under Section 130.
The writ petition is filed by the petitioner as no appellate tribunal is so far constituted in the state and the petitioner being aggrieved from the orders passed by the lower authorities could not file further appeal before tribunal. It is further submitted that 10% of total amount is already remitted as pre-condition for filing appeal
Kerala High Court held that services of looking after socio-economic and welfare matters of ex-serviceman by the charitable society is leviable to service tax. Accordingly, appeal dismissed the service tax leviable on the same.
Kerala High Court clarifies jurisdiction under the Contract Labour Act, ruling on employer liability for contractor wage defaults. Key legal principles analyzed.
Kerala High Court held that financial distress of the employer is not at all an excuse for denying or delaying payment of gratuity. Thus, held that no further time can be granted to employer for payment of gratuity.
