TaxTMI Login
🎉 Festive Offer: Flat 15% off on all plans! →⚡ Don’t Miss Out: Limited-Time Offer →
TaxTMI 
Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Delhi High Court Examines GST Provisions' Constitutionality, Acknowledges Madras HC Precedent</h1> <h3>BHARATIYA VITTA SALAHKAR SAMITI & ANR Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS</h3> The Delhi High Court considered the constitutionality of challenged provisions, noting the binding nature of a Madras High Court decision on the matter. ... Legality of decision in the case of REVENUE BAR ASSOCIATION VERSUS UNION OF INDIA, THE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX COUNCIL, THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU [2019 (9) TMI 983 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] - constitutionality of various provisions - Constitution of the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal and the qualification and appointment of members - Vires/Validity of Sections 109 and 110 of CGST Act, 2017 and Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. HELD THAT:- Matter adjourned to 19.11.2019. Issues:Constitutionality of provisions under challenge, possibility of challenging Madras High Court decision, suggestion to empower CESTAT for GST matters.Analysis:The judgment delivered by the Delhi High Court addresses several key issues. Firstly, the court noted that the decision of the Division Bench of the Madras High Court in certain writ petitions would be binding on the constitutionality of provisions challenged in the present case. This indicates the importance of precedent in determining the legality of the provisions in question. The court also acknowledged that the Respondent's counsel is considering whether to challenge the Madras High Court decision in the Supreme Court, highlighting the potential for further legal proceedings on this matter.Moreover, the Petitioner raised additional issues not covered by the Madras High Court decision. One notable suggestion put forth was to empower the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) to handle GST matters instead of establishing a separate tribunal. This proposal reflects a practical approach to streamlining the adjudication process for cases involving customs duties and GST.The case was adjourned to a later date to allow the Respondent's counsel to seek instructions on the mentioned aspects. This adjournment indicates the court's commitment to ensuring that all relevant considerations and instructions are obtained before proceeding further. Overall, the judgment demonstrates a thorough analysis of the legal issues at hand and a pragmatic approach to addressing the complexities of GST matters within the existing legal framework.
TaxTMI 
