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>Court orders continuation of appeal challenging interest levy on Gross Tax Liability under J.G.S.T. Act</h1> <h3>M/s BGR Mining and Infra Limited Versus The State of Jharkhand and others</h3> M/s BGR Mining and Infra Limited Versus The State of Jharkhand and others - TMI Issues:1. Dismissal of appeal against levy of interest on Gross Tax Liability under section 50 (1) of J.G.S.T. Act, 2017.2. Defect relating to filing of original communicated copy of the impugned order in appeals.3. Ignoring surviving defect in other writ petitions.4. Time allowed to seek instruction on the issue.5. Listing of the matter for further proceedings.Analysis:1. The petitioner challenged the dismissal of the appeal against the levy of interest on Gross Tax Liability under section 50 (1) of J.G.S.T. Act, 2017. The counsel argued that the dismissal was contrary to administrative instructions issued by CBIC and a previous order of the court in a batch of writ petitions concerning the same petitioner. The counsel contended that the Respondent No. 2's decision to uphold the levy of interest on Gross Tax Liability instead of Net Tax Liability for the periods in question was in violation of the court's orders on the same issue involving the same petitioner. The court noted the submissions and directed the matter for further proceedings.2. To rectify the defect related to the filing of the original communicated copy of the impugned order in the appeals, the petitioner filed interlocutory applications. The court considered the submissions made by the counsel and decided to ignore the defect, allowing the proceedings to move forward. The surviving defect in other writ petitions was requested to be disregarded, ensuring the continuity of the legal process.3. The counsel for the State was granted time to seek categorical instructions on the issue raised in the case. This step was taken to ensure that all parties involved had sufficient time to prepare and present their arguments effectively. The court set a date for the next hearing and instructed the Respondents to file any necessary affidavits before the specified deadline, facilitating a structured and organized progression of the legal proceedings.This detailed analysis of the judgment covers the issues raised, the arguments presented by the parties involved, and the court's decisions and directions for further proceedings, ensuring a comprehensive understanding of the legal matter at hand.
TaxTMI 