Follow Us:

Kerala High Court

Tribunal cannot rectify its order for different view by other tribunal in similar case

March 1, 2021 1818 Views 0 comment Print

P.T. Manuel And Sons Vs CIT (Kerala High Court) We are of the view that the reasoning of the Tribunal is erroneous. A decision taken subsequently in another case is not part of the record of the case. A subsequent decision, subsequent change of law, and/or subsequent wisdom dawned upon the Tribunal, are not matters […]

GST officer can suspend registration during pendency of proceedings relating to cancellation of registration

February 18, 2021 1236 Views 0 comment Print

Kans Wedding Centre Vs Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes (Kerala High Court) in the event the registered persons fail to file returns for a continuous period of six months, the proper officer can cancel the registration, but that has to be done by granting opportunity of hearing to the registered person. Rule 22 of the GST […]

Mere Gold Smuggling cannot be held as Terrorist Act; HC grants Bail to accused

February 18, 2021 1080 Views 0 comment Print

Muhammed Shafi P. Vs NIA (Kerala High Court) Undisputed facts are as follows:NIA registered the above mentioned case alleging offences punishable under Sections 16, 17 and 18 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (“UA(P) Act”, in short). Accused persons were arrested by NIA on different dates and they have been confined to custody for […]

No encashment of bank guarantee until expiry of 3 months from Order: Kerala HC:

February 16, 2021 2385 Views 0 comment Print

Varahamurthi Flexirub Industries Pvt. Ltd Vs State Tax Officer (Kerala High Court) Varahamurthi Flexirub Industries (P.) Ltd. (Petitioner) received an order of confirmation of penalty from the State Tax Officer (Respondents). The Petitioner had challenged the order of the Respondents in directing bank to invoke bank guarantee and to forward demand draft of value of […]

Consider inclusion of online gambling & betting under Kerala Gaming Act

February 10, 2021 861 Views 0 comment Print

High court directed directed State Government to take appropriate decision on the aspect of inclusion of online gambling and online betting, within the purview of the Kerala Gaming Act, 1960, within a period of two weeks from today.

Condonation of delay against order in GST ASMT-13 & FORM GST DRC-07

February 2, 2021 43578 Views 0 comment Print

Hash Constructions Vs Deputy Commissioner (Kerala High Court) Conclusion: Despite receipt of assessment order under Section 62, assessee-registered person had not filed any valid return within 30 days from the receipt of the assessment order. This ultimately had resulted in issuance of demand notice in FORM GST DRC-07, mentioning the amount due and payable by […]

Approach to deal with Transitional Credit issues in Hyper Technical Manner was wrong: HC

January 22, 2021 969 Views 0 comment Print

Union of India Vs A. F. Babu (Kerala High Court) By the impugned judgment, the learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition and directed the respondents in the writ petition to open an online portal to enable the first respondent to file the form GST TRAN-I electronically or to accept the same manually. Aggrieved by […]

Tribunal commits an error in releasing Canadian Green Peas on redemption fine payment: HC

January 22, 2021 681 Views 0 comment Print

Shri Amman Dhall Mill Vs Commissioner of Customs (Kerala High Court) Conclusion: Appellate Tribunal committed serious error in law by ordering release of Canadian Green Peas under Section 125 on payment of redemption fine as by holding that release of goods was the only option to Customs Commissioner in the case on hand the language […]

Dual payment was allowable to be refunded as State not expected to get unduly enriched by inadvertent payments of money

January 19, 2021 1539 Views 0 comment Print

If assessee calculated Light Dues in respect of the Vessel correctly and remitted the correct amount, then Section 19 of the Act, 1927 could not be resorted to withhold an erroneous double payment or dual payment made by a citizen due to a system error or failure.  The State was not expected to get itself unduly enriched by erroneous or forced or inadvertent payments of money made by its citizens and  was not expected to bring in defence of limitation in respect of such payments resulting in unjust enrichment.

Rule 138(5) not applies to goods transported from one state to another state

January 19, 2021 1971 Views 0 comment Print

UP And UP Elevators Vs State of Kerala (Kerala High Court) Undisputedly, goods which were sought to be transported from Bangalore to Cherthala came to be intercepted by the GST authorities on 15.01.2021 and at that time, the authorities found that e-way bill had expired on 14.01.2020. Therefore, goods were detained and detention order came […]

Search Post by Date
May 2026
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031