DELHI HIGH COURT [Anita Bansal Proprietress of A.B. Enterprises Vs The Union of India & Anr]

1. Petitioner impugns order dated 30.12.2023, whereby the impugned Show Cause Notice dated 23.09.2023, proposing a demand of Rs. 21,11,088.00 against the Petitioner has been disposed of and a demand including penalty has been raised against the Petitioner. The order has been passed under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

DELHI HIGH COURT [Surinder Kumar Garg Proprietor Shri Balaji Polymers Vs The Union of India Revenue Secretary, Ministry of Finance & Anr]

1. Petitioner impugns order dated 31.12.2023, whereby the impugned Show Cause Notice dated 26.09.2023, proposing a demand of Rs. 2,60,20,062.00 against the Petitioner has been disposed of and a demand including penalty has been raised against the Petitioner. The order has been passed under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

DELHI HIGH COURT [Biba Fashion Ltd Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi and Ors & Ors]

1. Petitioner impugns order dated 26.12.2023, whereby the impugned Show Cause Notice dated 24.09.2023, proposing a demand of Rs. 56,32,814.00 against the Petitioner has been disposed of and a demand including penalty has been raised against the Petitioner. The order has been passed under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

MADRAS HIGH COURT [S. Brithivirajan Vs Joint Commissioner (ST), Deputy Commissioner (ST), State Tax Officer]

This Writ Petition has been filed for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to quash the impugned order of the second respondent, dated 01.02.2023, in DR.No.1098 of 2022, and consequently, directing the fourth respondent to reassess the returns for the Assessment Year 2018-2019.

DELHI HIGH COURT [Mohd Zahid Vs Sales Tax Officer Class II/Avto Ward 10 Zone 2, State GST, Delhi & Anr]

1. Petitioner impugns order dated 15.02.2024, whereby the impugned Show Cause Notice dated 19.12.2023, proposing a demand of Rs. 7,87,18,296.00 against the Petitioner has been disposed of and a demand including penalty has been raised against the Petitioner. The order has been passed under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

DELHI HIGH COURT [Kaycee Polymers Pvt. Ltd Vs The Union of India Revenue Secretary & Ors]

1. Petitioner impugns order dated 30.03.2024, whereby the impugned Show Cause Notice dated 09.12.2023, proposing a demand of Rs. 50,00,080.00 against the Petitioner has been disposed of and a demand including penalty has been raised against the Petitioner. The order has been passed under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

DELHI HIGH COURT [Boxcoworld Logistics India Private Limited Vs Union of India & Ors]

1. Learned counsel for petitioner seeks stay of the operation of impugned order dated 30.12.2023. He, however, submits that if the matter is remitted for reconsideration of the Show Cause Notice without prejudice to his rights and contentions, he would not press his stay application or the petition any further.

MADRAS HIGH COURT [Oasys Cybernetics Private Limited Represented by its Managing Director Vs State Tax Officer ]

An assessment order dated 29.12.2023 is challenged in this writ petition. The petitioner is engaged in the business of supplying and installing point of sale machines in ration shops operated by the Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation by integrating the same with a central server. In respect of assessment period 2017-18, the petitioner received show cause notice dated 14.09.2023 with regard to discrepancies between the petitioner`s GSTR 3B returns and the auto populated GSTR 2A. Such show cause notice was replied to on 10.10.2023 and 17.10.2023 by enclosing annexures. The impugned order was issued on 29.12.2023 in the said facts and circumstances.

MADRAS HIGH COURT [L & T Finance Limited, (Represented By Its Divisional Legal Manager Shri G. Venkatesan) Vs The Assistant Commissioner, Chennai]

An assessment order dated 31.12.2023 is assailed primarily on the ground of breach of principles of natural justice.

MADRAS HIGH COURT [AP Studio Enterprises, Represented By The Proprietor, Subramani Eswaran Narsingapuram Vs The Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC), Chennai ]

An order dated 29.12.2023 is challenged in this writ petition. The petitioner received a show cause notice dated 29.09.2023. The said show cause notice was replied to on 16.10.2023 by stating that the reason for discrepancy between the GSTR 3B return of the petitioner and the auto-populated GSTR 2A was the belated filing of GSTR 1 by the supplier in respect of one invoice. The petitioner states that he was unable to upload the reply on the portal. The order impugned herein was issued in the said facts and circumstances.

MADRAS HIGH COURT [Ravi Kumar Distilleries Limited Vs The Assistant Commissioner, The Deputy Commissioner (Excise), Shashi Distilleries Private Limited, Gemini Distilleries (Pondicherry) Inc., John Distilleries Private Ltd., Radico Khaitan Limited, Tilaknagar Industries Ltd]

An order dated 11.12.2023 is assailed primarily on the ground that documents submitted by the petitioner were disregarded. The petitioner is engaged in business relating to the manufacture of alcoholic beverages. A show cause notice dated 29.09.2023 was received by the petitioner in relation to alleged non payment of GST. Such show cause notice was replied to on 24.10.2023 and again on 15.11.2023. The impugned order was issued in these facts and circumstances.

MADRAS HIGH COURT [Ram Agencies, Rep. By Its Proprietrix Adaikkammal Vs The Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax, Thanjavur ]

The petitioner has challenged the Order-in-Original No.24/2023- GST, dated 26.12.2023, passed by the respondent in respect of the assessment years 2017-2018, 2018-2019 and 2019-2020.

Page: