GST Litigation: What It Means and How Businesses Can Handle GST Disputes
Learn what GST litigation means, why GST disputes happen, common GST notices, appeal-related issues, and how expert guidance can help businesses respond correctly.
The legacy scheme should be broad enough to cover seizure cases
Case covered: SATISH KUMAR JAIN VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Facts of the case: The issue that arises for consideration is whether the proposed confiscation is covered by the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019. Observations of the court: Prima facie, it appears
Amendment in section 50 is clarificatory and operative retrospectively.
Case covered: M/s.Refex Industries Limited Versus The Assistant Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise Facts of the case: PETITIONs filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying for the issuance of Writ of Certiorari calling for the records of the impugned notice to
Do the Authorities have the power to ARREST prior to adjudication.
Nowadays we continuously are getting information that so and so person is arrested due to the fake invoice/fraudulent ITC etc. QUESTION before the Hon’ble Court does they have the power to ARREST prior to adjudication. Although there are judgments in this regards wherein it is
Notices for reversal of ITC under Section 16(4) challenged
Case covered: TIMES HEAVEN CLUB PVT. LTD. Versus UNION OF INDIA Facts of the case: A lot of notices are being sent by way of mail as well as in hard copy with regards to the reversal of input tax credit along with interest as
Stay given by the Hon’ble GHC against recovery of interest u/s.50 of the GST Act
Stay given by the Hon’ble GHC against recovery of interest u/s.50 of the GST Act Case covered: M/s AMAR CARS PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS UNION OF INDIA Oral Order: Let notice be issued to the respondents, returnable on 11.03.2020. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for
Supreme Court’s Six Mandatory Directions To Political Parties To End Criminalisation Of Politics
Case covered: RAMBABU SINGH THAKUR Versus SUNIL ARORA & ORS. Facts of the case: This contempt petition raises grave issues regarding the criminalization of politics in India and brings to our attention a disregard of the directions of a Constitution Bench of this Court in
18% GST applicable on Transformers supplied to Indian Railways: AAR
Case covered: RISHAB INDUSTRIES Facts of the case: The present application has been filed under Section 97 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act 2017 and the Maharashtra Goods and Service Tax Act 2017( hereinafter referred to as ”the CGST Act and MGST Act”)
Interest Under Section 50 of the CGST Act is Automatic: Madras HC
Case covered: The Assistant Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise Versus M/s.Daejung Moparts Pvt Ltd. Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order of the learned Single Judge passed in W.P.No.15624 of 2019 dated 13.06.2019. Common Order: These
Provisional Attachment under GST Act to Protect Revenue is not an Omnibus Power
Case covered: M/s. GehnaTrading LLP Versus Union of India and Ors. Facts of the case: By this Petition, the Petitioner has challenged the action of the Respondents in provisionally attaching the bank account of the Petitioner. On 6 December 2019 the Deputy Commissioner, Central
Supreme Court stays Rajasthan High Court Order extending the deadline of GSTR-9 and GSTR-9C
Case covered: UNION OF INDIA Petitioner(s) VERSUS TAX BAR ASSOCIATION & ORS. Respondent(s) Facts of the case: A petition for Special Leave to Appeal (C) is filed by the Government of India in the Supreme Court of India (Arising out of impugned final judgment
Wonderful Development in yesterday’s GST Matter of Supreme Court
Wonderful Development in yesterday’s GST Matter of Supreme Court: Today learned Solicitor General mentioned the matter at 10.30 am to inform & seek small correction that system is charging a late fee after 5th (instead of 12th). Hon’ble Supreme Court corrected the order by clarifying
Dell CESTAT Order- USE ITC FOR PRE-DEPOSIT
Case covered: M/s. Dell International Services India Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Tax Facts of the case: The Registry has raised the objection that the appellant is required to pay 7.5%/10% of the duty/tax and file proof of the same. In reply to the defect