Search Results for "CGST refund"

103 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 103 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court Quashes Penalty on Company Officials Under CGST Act Due to Lack of Personal Liability Evidence and Procedural Flaws. Petitioners Challenge Penalty Order for Fake Input Tax Credit Allegations

The petitioners, employees of M/s. Shemaroo Entertainment Limited, filed a writ petition challenging an order-in-original dated 1 February 2025 that i...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Interest on Delayed GST Refund Despite Red Flagging of Exporter. Petitioner entitled to interest under Section 56 of CGST Act for period beyond 60 days from filing shipping bill, as red flagging does not justify indefinite delay.

The petitioner, Ms. Anita Agarwal, sole proprietor of M/s. Shanker International, is an exporter of goods such as Ethyl Alcohol Liquid Packaging Film ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

GST on Advances for Future Supplies: Examining Constitutional Validity. Evaluating GST's application to unutilized advances and its constitutionality.

The L&T IHI Consortium, a collaboration between Larsen & Toubro Ltd. (L&T) and IHI Infrastructure Systems Co. Ltd., Japan, challenged the ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court Quashes GST Appellate Order Against Indian Oil Corporation for Violation of Natural Justice — Pre-deposit Requirement Set Aside. Failure to Provide Personal Hearing and Reasoned Order Renders Appellate Order Unsustainable Under Section 107(11) of CGST Act, 2017.

The petitioner, M/s Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., a public sector undertaking engaged in storage and supply of petroleum products, filed a writ petitio...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Refund of IGST on Exports Under Protest, Rejects Unjust Enrichment Claim. Payment under protest does not attract doctrine of unjust enrichment under Section 54 of CGST Act, 2017.

The petitioner, Venus Jewel, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Bombay High Court, challenging the refusa...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes GST Summons Issued by DGGI Ahmedabad to Petitioners in Maharashtra for Lack of Territorial Jurisdiction. Summons under Section 70 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 must be issued by an officer having jurisdiction over the place of business of the person summoned.

The petitioners, Shantanu Sanjay Hundekari, Vikas Agarwal, Yogesh Agarwal, and Mamta Gupta, are residents of Maharashtra and their place of business i...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Interest on Delayed Refund of CENVAT Credit Under Section 11BB of Central Excise Act, 1944. Petitioner entitled to interest from expiry of three months from date of refund application till actual refund.

The petitioner, Qualcomm India Private Limited, a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, is engaged in providing support services to its ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Upholds Constitutional Validity of Time Limit for Availing Input Tax Credit Under Section 16(4) of CGST Act. The court held that the time limit is mandatory and not directory, and retrospective amendments are valid.

The Bombay High Court, in a batch of writ petitions, addressed the constitutional validity and interpretation of Section 16(4) of the Central Goods an...