Tata Cons I Tweet

Vedanta I Tweet

CIGNITI TECHNOLOGIES LTD I ? Transaction by Large shareholder s

IRCTC I Tweet

From a perusal of Sub-section (5) of Section 140 of the CGST Act, it is evident that beyond the period of thirty days, an assessee can claim the transitional credit of input tax within another thirty days only on production of an order passed by the Commissioner. In other words, unless the order is passed by the Commissioner extending the limitation period, an assessee cannot claim the input tax credit in respect of the inward supply taken before 1/07/2017. The appellant filed the application for extending the time of limitation, claiming transitional credit only after five years. The Commissioner, therefore, rightly rejected the application. As the Commissioner did not extend the limitation period, the appellant cannot claim the benefit of transitional credit regarding input tax. The writ appeal accordingly stands dismissed.

This appeal has been preferred challenging the judgment of the learned Single Judge. The rectification under section 161 of the GST Act is permissible only when there are errors apparent on the face of the record, in a situation where the show cause notice was contested, which is not the case here. When a show cause notice is not contested, the resultant order passed assumes the nature of an agreed order and a rectification application will not lie to correct a factual mistake therein

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. by petitioner seeking bail in the event of his arrest. The Honourable Supreme Court held that at the stage of summons the person summoned cannot invoke Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In view of the aforesaid observation of the Honourable Supreme Court, the Criminal Petition is disposed off.

It is the case of the petitioner that the notification dated 31.03.2023 extending the time limit specified under Section 73 of the Act by virtue of the powers under Section 168A of the Act is unjustified as extension has to be for special circumstances. Issue Notice to the respondents returnable on 30.11.2023.

This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned order passed by the respondent. This Court feels that the time period of 2 days is not sufficient to make the payment of demanded amount by the petitioner. Hence, this Court is inclined to grant a period of 3 months time to the petitioner for payment of balance amount demanded by the respondent towards interest.

The writ petition challenges an order in an appeal which was dismissed on the ground of delay. This court set aside the impugned order and direct the assessee to satisfy the conditions mentioned in Notification No. 53/2023 before the time stipulated i.e. 31.01.2024, in which event, the appeal would be taken up and considered on merits.

Issue is related to GST on the amount deposited in Indian currency of the salary component to seconded employees. Further proceedings are stayed in pursuance of the show cause notice

Seeks to extend dates of specified compliances in exercise of powers under section 168A of CGST Act