Prof K J Joseph, Director, GIFT, launching KTR Online Edition in the presence of KTR Team

Latest

TVL.TRANSTONNELSTROY AFCONS JOINT VENTURE Vs. UNION OF INDIA & ORs

(2021) 29 KTR 89 (Mad) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Tvl.Transtonnelstroy Afcons Joint Venture Vs. UNION OF INDIA &  Ors  (A.P. Sahi, C.J and Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, J.) Dated 21st September, 2020 CONSTITUTIONAL VALIDITY - GOODS AND SERVICES TAX – INVERTED DUTY STRUCTURE - SECTION 54 (3) OF THE CGST ACT,2017 - PROVIDED FOR CLAIMING REFUND OF “ANY UNUTILISED INPUT TAX” – PER CONTRA, RULE 89(5) OF THE CGST RULES, RESTRICTS THE CLAIM OF REFUND ONLY TO “INPUT” - EXCLUDING “INPUT SERVICES” FROM THE PURV...

SATHEEK L. Vs. STATE OF KERALA

 (2021)  29 KTR 84 (Ker) IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA SATHEEK L. Vs. STATE OF KERALA (K. Vinod Chandran and T.R. Ravi, JJ.) Dated 10th November, 2020 VALUE ADDED TAX – WORKS CONTRACT – CRUSHED METAL USED IN TARRING – WHETHER CONSUMABLE BEING EXCLUDED FROM TAX– NO - *RULE 10(2)(k)(iv) OF THE KERALA VALUE ADDED TAX RULES, 2005. VALUE ADDED TAX – WORKS CONTRACT – ASSESSEE PAID TAX ON RECEIPT BASIS- ASSESSMENT COMPLETED ASSESSING CLOSING WORK IN PROGRESS ALSO – DIFFERENT METHOD IN DEVIATION FROM PREVIOUS YEARS &ndash...

PODARAN FOODS INDIA PVT. LTD. Vs STATE OF KERALA & ORS.

(2021)  29 KTR 67 (Ker) IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA PODARAN FOODS INDIA PVT. LTD. Vs STATE OF KERALA & ORS. (A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar, J.) Dated 12th January, 2021 DETENTION – SECTION 129 – LEGALITY OF ORDERS OF DETENTION – SCOPE AND AMBIT OF SECTION 129 DISCUSSED – FORM GST MOV-6 IS NOT A FINAL ORDER AND HENCE NOT OPEN TO PREFER ANY STATUTORY APPEAL OR WRIT PETITION – WRIT COURT NOT TO BE ORDINARILY APPROACHED CHALLENGING DETENTION ORDERS – PROPER OFFICER SHOULD NOT INVOKE BANK GUARANTEE FOR A PERIOD OF THREE MONTHS FRO...

VKC FOOTSTEPS INDIA PVT. LTD. Vs. UNION OF INDIA & ORS

GOODS AND SERVICES TAX – SECTION 54 (3) OF THE CGST ACT,2017 - PROVIDED FOR CLAIMING  REFUND OF “ANY UNUTILISED INPUT TAX” – PER CONTRA, RULE 89(5) OF THE CGST RULES, RESTRICTS THE CLAIM OF  REFUND ONLY TO “INPUT” - EXCLUDING  “INPUT SERVICES” FROM THE PURVIEW OF “INPUT TAX CREDIT” - RESTRICTING THE STATUTORY PROVISION CANNOT BE THE INTENT OF LAW – SECTION 54(3) OF THE CGST ACT,2017; RULE 89(5) OF THE CGST RULES,2017; CIRCULAR NO.79/53/2018/GST DATED: 31.12.2018. GOODS AND SERVICES TAX – VIRES OF CGST RU...

ACT       |       RULE    |       FORMS
NOTIFICATION
ADVANCE RULING
CLARIFICATION
CIRCULARS       |       ORDERS
REMOVAL OF DIFFICULTY ORDERS