Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court
For assessee
Case-law directory
Every ruling, in plain sight.
Search and filter tax rulings from the Supreme Court, the High Courts, the GST Appellate Tribunal and the advance-ruling authorities.
Case-law directory
Search and filter tax rulings from the Supreme Court, the High Courts, the GST Appellate Tribunal and the advance-ruling authorities.
9 rulings found
Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court
Where petitioner-taxi union was permitted to operate on public land under temporary allotment and rental terms, respondents could not demand GST on rentals for period prior to 08.07.2017 since GST came into force only thereafter, and petitioner was liable for dues with GST only for period commencing from 08.07.2017
GSTAT Hyderabad
Where outsourced caterer supplied food to in-patients within a hospital under contract, and only one supply, namely food, was made to hospital and not as part of composite healthcare supply, GST was leviable on such supply, as composite supply test failed and CBIC Circular supporting exemption applied only to supplies directly by healthcare provider and not outsourced caterer GST: Where caterer did not pay tax on in-patient food supplies based on an incorrect understanding of a Board Circular and no deliberate non-payment was established, invocation of section 74 was unsustainable, and dropping of penalty further negated mala fide intent, thus proceedings were to be treated under section 73 with proper re-determination of tax, interest and penalties GST: Where caterer supplied food to in-patients as per agreement with invoices showing no separate GST tax and department did not allege collection of tax above invoice value, invoice value was to be treated inclusive of tax, requiring application of cum-tax valuation under Rule 35, and tax liability was to be recomputed accordingly, ensuring no excess collection beyond statutory due
Calcutta High Court
Where electrical line repair and maintenance services had been completed in 2015 before introduction of GST, subsequent approval and billing in 2019 could not alter date of supply or bring completed services within GST regime, consequently payment withheld for want of GST registration was directed to be released with interest after deducting tax, if any, applicable under pre-GST regime
Rajasthan High Court
Where a school challenged levy and collection of GST on affiliation fees via circular and notice, and precedence established parity between school and college affiliations regarding GST applicability, levy on school affiliation fees was held unsustainable and both impugned circular and subsequent notice along with all consequential proceedings were to be quashed on the basis of parity with legal precedent
Karnataka High Court
Where property acquired by compulsory acquisition for highway widening included land with attached structure and compensation was awarded, deduction of GST from compensation was unwarranted since such expropriation did not constitute a supply of goods or services under GST scheme and no statutory basis existed for GST levy, thus GST deduction was ultra vires and liable for refund
AAR Gujarat
Where applicant job worker performs offset printing and related pre- and post- printing activities on kraft paper and duplex paper supplied by principals without transfer of title, these constitute naturally bundled composite supply with offset printing as principal supply under Heading 9988, and since principal goods attract 18 percent GST, entry 26(iv) applies making job work taxable at 18 percent GST
AAR Rajasthan
Where a GST-registered JV undertook a composite works contract under HSN 9954 for sewerage treatment infrastructure and relied on Notification 11/2017-CTR for 12% GST at bid stage before its concessional entry was omitted by later notification, applicable rate as on 01.06.2022 was 12 percent, since omission operated prospectively from 18.07.2022
Karnataka High Court
Where contractors executing government works spanning pre-GST and post- GST periods faced disputes on segregation of supplies, GST computation and supplementary agreements, writ petitions were to be allowed in terms of specific and operative directions laid down in Chandrashekaraiah v. State of Karnataka [2024] 158 appropriate proceedings
Karnataka High Court
Where a Class-I contractor, after award of works contract before GST regime, paid differential GST arising from transition from VAT to GST and sought reimbursement from State which remained unresolved, State as service recipient was obligated to reimburse such differential GST attributable to regime change since petitioner had executed work and discharged due tax as per law