In re Ashish Arvind Hansoti (GST AAR Maharashtra) Question : Whether applicant is eligible to claim input tax credit of GST paid on input & input services used for construction of commercial immovable property, subsequently used for renting? Section (17) (5) (d) bars a taxable person, in the subject case the applicant, from taking input […]
In re M/s. Lfonds India Pvt. Ltd. (GST AAR Maharashtra) The applicant has submitted a letter dated 24.02.2020 and requested that they may be allowed to voluntarily withdraw their subject application filed on 24.02.2020. The request of the applicant to withdraw the application voluntarily and unconditionally is hereby allowed, without going into the merits or […]
Ruchi Soya Industries Ltd Vs. Union of India (Gujarat High Court) 1. Rule returnable forthwith. Mr.Nirzar Desai, learned Standing Counsel waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent no.1. Mr.Parth Bhatt, learned advocate waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent nos.2 and 3. Mr.Kartik Pandya, learned advocate waives […]
The Respondent has also claimed that the pricing of products depended on a number of commercial factors. In this connection it would be pertinent to mention that the provisions of Section 171 (1) of the above Act required the Respondent to pass on the benefit of tax reduction to the consumers only and have no mandate to look in to fixing of prices of the products which the Respondent was free to fix.
It was alleged that NY Cinemas had not passed on the benefit of reduction in the GST rates on Services by way of admission to exhibition of cinematograph films where price of admission ticket was above one hundred rupees from 28% to 18%
In re Ruby Mills Ltd. (GST AAR Uttarakhand) Whether fusible interlining fabrics of Cotton fall for classification HSN Code 5903 or under chapter 52? On perusal of the Note 2 to Chapter heading 5903 , we find that the said heading covers textile fabrics, impregnated, coated, covered or laminated with plastics. Such products are classified here whatever […]
In re Fom Aluminium Machines Pvt. Ltd. (GST AAR Karnataka) The third question which reads as ‘Is IGST paid under RCM eligible for ITC?’ The levy of IGST is only on the inter-state supplies and importation of goods/services is treated as inter-state supply, in terms of Section 7(2)/7(4) of the IGST Act 2017 respectively. The […]
N J Devani Builders Pvt. Ltd Vs Union Of India (Gujarat High Court) Petitioner had voluntarily registered under the head of ‘commercial /industrial construction services’, the petitioner is liable to pay service tax, is not tenable as the petitioner cannot be held to be liable to pay service tax before 01.06.2007, where, it is not […]
TATA Hitachi Construction Machinery Company Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Karnataka (Karnataka High Court) The issue under consideration is whether Tribunal was correct in rejecting the C-Forms submitted by the petitioner and hence denying statutory benefits? The Appellate Tribunal at the threshold has rejected the declaration forms on the ground of delay. It is well […]
Kambay Aromatics Vs Union of India (Gujarat High Court) It appears that if the petitioner could not upload the form GST TRAN1 due to technical glitches and in spite of various representations made by the petitioner, he was not allowed to upload the form GST TRAN1. In view of the settled legal position as stated […]
