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.
Most Controversial Rulings in Last 33 Months
ADVANCE RULING CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT, 2017 The provisions for Advance Rulings have been provided through Sections 95 to 106 of Chapter 17 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (‘CGST Act, 2017’). This concept has been borrowed from Service Tax
Whether the sale of goods in India belonging to associate situated abroad to be treated as export service or an intermediary service thereby taxable in India
Whether the sale of goods in India belonging to associate situated abroad to be treated as export service or an intermediary service thereby taxable in India CRODA INDIA COMPANY PVT LTD Vs COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX PETITIONER: Croda India Company Pvt Ltd RESPONDENT: Commissioner of
CESTAT in the case of Croda India Company Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Service Tax
Case Covered: Croda India Company Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Service Tax-VII Facts of the case: This appeal is directed against order in original No 46/ST-VII/RS/2014 dated 23.03.2015 of Commissioner Service Tax –VII Mumbai. By the said order Commissioner has held as follows: “4.1 I
No GST on director’s salary
Case Covered: M/s Anil Kumar Agarwal Facts of the case: Mr. Anil Kumar Agarwal, Flat # H-801, ETA Garden, Magadi Road, Oppo. Binny Hills, Banglore 560023, an unregistered person having User ID 29100000213ART, has filed an application for Advance Ruling under Section 97 of the CGST
Condonation of delay denied: M/s. Glaxo Smith Kline Consumer Health Care Limited
Case Covered: Assistant Commissioner (CT) LTU, Kakinada & Ors. Versus M/s. Glaxo Smith Kline Consumer Health Care Limited Read the full text of the case here. Facts of the case: The moot question in this appeal emanating from the judgment and order dated 19.11.2018 in Writ Petition No. 39418/2018 passed by the High Court of Judicature
SC in the case of Assistant Commissioner (CT) LTU, Kakinada Versus M/s. Glaxo Smith Kline Consumer Health Care Limited
Citations: Electronics Corporation of India Ltd. vs. Union of India & Ors Baburam Prakash Chandra Maheshwari vs. Antarim Zila Parishad now Zila Parishad, Muzaffarnagar Nivedita Sharma vs. Cellular Operators Association of India & Ors Thansingh Nathmal & Ors. vs.
Important Observations from Delhi High Court Judgment in Brand Equity
Important Observations from Delhi High Court Judgment in Brand Equity Important Observations from Delhi High Court Judgment in Brand Equity rendered on 05-05-2020 while directing the Union of India to accept the TRAN-1 till 30-06-2020 and publicize the contents of Judgments on its website, so,
Karnataka AAR Order in the case of M/s Solize India Technologies Private Limited
Case Covered: M/s Solize India Technologies Private Limited Facts of the case: M/s Solize India Technologies Private Limited, Gayathri Lake Front, Survy No. 188, Ring Road, Hebbal, Bengaluru 560024, (hereinafter referred to as “the applicant”) and having a GSTIN 29AAACC7355D1ZQ, has filed an application for
Karnataka AAR order in the case of M/s Empathic Trading Centre
Case Covered: M/s Empathic Trading Centre Facts of the case: The applicant is a proprietary concern registered under the provisions of the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. The applicant states that he is engaged in the business of supplying goods under the trade name
GST Litigation(VAT) GST Vs IBC : Tale of two judgments
Brief Background of IBC before we understand GST Vs IBC Recovery after completion of insolvency proceedings. Is it tenable under the law? A long battle of GST Vs IBC is there in courts. It will go further. tax authorities will keep sending the notices. Can
CA Shafaly GirdharwalGarnishee proceeding against a company after insolvency, upheld by Ranchi High Court
Case Covered: Electrosteel Steels Limited Versus The State of Jharkhand Read the full text of the case here. Facts of the case: In all these writ applications, the petitioner Company has challenged the garnishee order bearing No.727 dated 21.11.2019, issued under Section 46 of the
Jharkhand HC in the case of Electrosteel Steels Limited Versus The State of Jharkhand
Citations: Innovative Industries Limited Vs. ICICI Bank & Anr Embassy Property Developments Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Karnataka & Ors Swiss Ribbons Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. Vs. Union of India & Ors Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Monnet Ispat & Energy Ltd. Committee of