w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



Vimal Nayan & Others v/s The Principal Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Headquarters Preventive Unit, Chennai North Commissionerate, Nungambakkam, Chennai & Another


Company & Directors' Information:- GST PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U27104MH2002PTC136410

Company & Directors' Information:- VIMAL INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U24231DL1999PTC099648

    Crl.OP. Nos. 30467, 30470, 30474, 30477, 304 81, 30488 & 30490 of 2018

    Decided On, 12 February 2019

    At, High Court of Judicature at Madras

    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH

    For the Petitioners: A. Abdul Hameed for M/s. AAV Partners, Advocates. For the Respondents: M. Venkateswaran, Spl. PP.



Judgment Text

(Prayer in Crl.O.P.No.30467 of 2018: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest for the alleged offence under Section 132 of the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017, r/w the provisions under the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Act, 2017, in File C.No. IV/06/88/2018-HPU.Gr-IX, on the file of the respondents.)

Common Order:

1. The petitioners facing prosecution before the respondents for the alleged offences punishable under Section 132 of the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017, are seeking anticipatory bail before this Court.

2. The case of the prosecution is that various organised companies/persons registered with the GSTN portal have involved themselves in issuing fake invoices without actual supply of Goods/Services and also receiving fake invoices without receipt of goods and avail input tax credit to cheat the exchequer. In the instant case, it is the specific case of the prosecution that the concerned companies have involved in issue of fake invoices without supply of goods and also received fake invoices without receipt of goods and thereby all the accused persons have committed offences under Section 132(1)(b) and 132(1) (c) of CGST Act, 2017. [CGST Act, 2017 - hereinafter referred as "the Act"]. By committing the offence, the exchequer has been put to a huge loss running to several thousand crores, which according to the prosecution goes against the very interest of the country's economy.

3. Mr.A.Abdul Hameed, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that M/s. Devmata Exim Private Limited is carrying on the business of Trading of Steel and allied products. Likewise M/s. Aks Alloys Private Limited, M/s.K.S.Holding Private Limited, M/s. Data Shree Metals and Minerals Private Limited and M/s.Sar Ispat Private Limited are all involved in the very same business of manufacturing of Steel and allied products. The learned counsel submitted that under Section 31(1) of the Act, every registered trader has to issue an invoice containing details regarding the goods, which is being supplied either before or at the time of removal of goods, for supply to the recipient, where the supply involves movement of goods.

4. The learned counsel would further submit that as per Section 41 of the Act, the registered trader is entitled to take credit of eligible input tax as self assessed in his return and such amount will be credited, provisionally to his credit ledger.

5. The learned counsel would further submit that any violation of the provisions would lead to three consequences viz; levy of interest under Section 50 of the Act, recovery of Tax under Section 79 of the Act and imposition of penalty under Section 122 of the Act. The learned counsel would further submit that the authorised officer is empowered to initiate criminal proceedings for the offence committed under Section 132 of the Act, which carries a punishment of five years with fine and the authorised officer is also empowered to arrest the accused persons by virtue of the powers conferred under Section 69 of the Act.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the Act is a recent enactment with various unresolved issues and the respondent is proceeding further to prosecute the petitioners on mere assumptions and surmises on the ground that the petitioners are involved in issuing invoices without supply of goods/services. The learned counsel would submit that the petitioners have attended the enquiry and given statements and also submitted voluminous documents to show that there was movement of goods from the factory and there was no requirement for the petitioners to indulge in utilising fake invoices.

7. Per contra, Mr.M.Venkateswaran, learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondents would submit that the present case is only a tip of the iceberg, of a huge scandal that has come to light only recently to the department whereby various organised companies registered with the GSTN Portal have involved themselves in issuing fake invoices without supply of goods/ services and also receiving fake invoices without receipt of goods and are availing input tax credit which has caused huge loss to the exchequer running to several thousand crores of rupees.

8. The learned Special Public Prosecutor further submitted that a primarily investigation was conducted with one Danaram and Dilip Kumar which revealed that they have committed an offence under Section 132 (1)(b) and 132(1)(c) by issuing GST invoices without supply of goods/services and also have availed input tax credit in the companies floated and managed by them in the names of third party. These persons were arrested and remanded to Judicial custody during November 2018. On further investigation, based on the invoices issued by the above said two persons, it came to light that Smt. Poonam Sharma, Dr.Sanjay Kumar Sharma and Ms.Heena Kumar Sharma, have created companies in the name and style of 1) M/s.Nadesh Trade Impex Private Limited, 2) M/s.Anmol Ferro Impex Private Limited and 3) M/s. Vivan Trade Impex Private Limited. The above said three persons are directors in these three companies apart from three other persons.

9. The learned Special Public Prosecutor further submitted that in the names of the above said three companies, GST invoices have been issued for several crores of rupees without supply of materials and thereby facilitating the buyer of the invoices to avail input tax credit. That apart, they have also received GST invoices from fake companies running to several crores of rupees without receipt of goods/services. Statements were recorded from these persons and it was categorically admitted by them that fake invoices were issued without supply of any goods and only with an intention to enable the receiver to avail input tax credit and from that they took commission on the invoice value. All these persons were arrested and remanded to Judicial custody.

10. The learned Special Public Prosecutor would further submit that on further investigation it came to be known that the companies belonging to the petitioners have received fake GST invoices from the above said accused persons and have availed input tax credit without supply of goods/services. Therefore the petitioners were called to attend an enquiry and without giving a statement and supplying all relevant records, the petitioners have chosen to approach this Court by filing Anticipatory Bail Petitions. The learned counsel submitted that the issue involves national interest since the loss to the exchequer runs to several thousands of crores of rupees.

11. This Court has carefully considered the submissions made on either side. It will be relevant to take note of certain provisions under the Act. As per Section 31 of CGST Act, 2017:-

(1) A registered person supplying taxable goods shall, before or at the time of –

(a) removal of goods for supply to the recipient, where the supply involves movement of goods: or

(b) delivery of goods or making available thereof to the recipient, in any other case, issue a tax invoice showing the description, quantity and value of goods, the tax charged thereon and such other particulars as may be prescribed.

As per Section 132(1)(b) of the CGST Act, 2017, any person "issues any invoice or bill without supply of goods or services or both in violation of the provisions of this Act or the rules made there under leading to wrongful availment or utilisation of input tax credit or refund of tax".

As per Section 132 (1)(c) of the CGST Act, 2017, any person "avails input tax credit using such invoice or bill referred to in clause (b);"

As per Section 13(1)(i) of the CGST Act, 2017, "in cases where the amount of tax evaded or the amount of input tax credit wrongly availed or utilised or the amount of refund wrongly taken exceeds five hundred lakh rupees, with imprisonment for a term which may extend to five years and with fine;"

Further as per Section 132 (5) of the CGST Act, 2017, the offences specified in clause (a) or clause (b) or clause (c) or clause (d) of subsection (1) and punishable under clause(i) of that sub-section shall be cognizable and nonbailable.

Further as per Section 69(1) of the CGST Act, 2017, "Where the Commissioner has reasons to believe that a person has committed any offence specified in clause (a) or clause (b) or clause (c) or clause (d) of sub-section (1) of section 132 which is punishable under clause (i) or (ii) of sub-section (1), or sub-section (2) of the said section, he may, by order authorise any officer of central tax to arrest such persons".

12. The case of the prosecution is that the companies involved in these cases have received invoices without receipt of goods/ services from the supplier of bogus invoices to enable them to avail the input tax credit and to reduce their cash payment. This is an offence under Section 32(1)(b) & 32(1) (c) of the Act. According to the respondent department the petitioners are adopting a modus operandi whereby they make payment to the suppliers of invoices without movement of goods/services through banking channel and get back such amount after payment of agreed commission to the supplier of fake invoices. This according to the prosecution involves loss to the exchequer running to several crores and is against the national interest.

13. The department has taken a very specific stand in this case at paragraph 17 of the Counter filed in these petitions which is extracted hereunder:

"17. ...............In the instant case the investigation carried out so far by the Department inter alia revealed that companies managed by the petitioners are involved in the aforesaid offences. Hence the petitioner was summoned by the Department. If the petitioner got the evidences that they are not involved in the above said offences, they would have appeared before the investigating officer and proved their innocence. The department is in the process of identifying the various persons involved in the above such offences and are being summoned to unearth the possibilities of revenue leakages created by these offenders".

14. The enactment in question has come into force very recently with a laudable object of one country one tax. Therefore wherever the department finds that certain provisions in the Act is misused by creating fake invoices and input tax credit is being availed without any movement of goods, the same has to be curbed and nipped in the bud to ensure that it does not grow into another mega scam having a direct impact on the economy of this nation. Since the department has collected some prima facie materials , they want to act fast before it becomes a huge racket, failing which the entire economy of this country would weaken and collapse.

15. If the petitioners are conducting genuine business through the above said companies, they can easily prove during the investigation the actual movement of goods, which will all be borne out by documents. If the department is satisfied regarding the same, the department will leave out the companies belonging tothe petitioners and proceed further with the investigation.

16. In the considered view of this Court, in matters of this nature, the department must be given the complete independence to investigate the cases since it involves the national interest. This Court by entertaining an Anticipatory Bail Petition and by imposing certain conditions, should not tie the hands of the department in proceeding further with the investigation since what has been unearthed till now is only the tip of the iceberg and there is a long way to go for the department to find out how long this fake invoices have extended their tentacles.

17. As argued by the learned counsel for the petitioners, it is true that the entire issue is borne out by documents and once the petitioners co-operate for the inv

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

estigation by submitting all the relevant documents, they should not be unnecessarily arrested. However, it is a settled proposition of law that this Court while considering a petition for Anticipatory Bail has to necessarily taking into consideration the nature and gravity of the accusation in a given case. When a case involves serious offences, grant of Anticipatory Bail by itself will cause prejudice to the investigation. Where the accused persons are charged of violation of CGST Act, involving colossal loss of revenue to the exchequer and the investigation is at a very nascent stage, prudence demands that this Court should lay of its hands from the investigation and allow complete independence to the prosecuting agency to proceed further with the investigation. 18. In the light of the nature and gravity of the accusations put forth by the prosecution and also the fact that the investigation is at its very early stages, this Court is not inclined to entertain these Anticipatory Bail Petitions. It is open to the petitioners to make complete disclosure by submitting all the relevant documents before the respondent and it is for the respondent to consider the same and satisfy themselves and proceed further in accordance with law. Accordingly, all these criminal original petitions shall stand dismissed.
O R







Judgements of Similar Parties

14-08-2020 P.P. Suresh Kumar, Managing Director, Kerala Communications Cable Ltd., Kochi & Another Versus The Deputy Director, Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI), Thiruvananthapuram & Others High Court of Kerala
05-08-2020 Doosan Infracore India Private Limited, Rep., by N. Krishnakumar Versus The Assistant Commissioner, Office of the Commissioner of GST and Central Excise, Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
04-08-2020 The Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Chennai South Commissinerate, Chennai Versus M/s. Saksoft Ltd., Perungudi, Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
03-07-2020 Subhash Joshi & Another Versus Director General of GST Intelligence (DGGI) & Others High Court of Madhya Pradesh Bench at Indore
26-06-2020 U. Manikandan, Mani Poultry Farm, Annamooli, Palakkad Versus The Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, State GST Department, Special Circle, Palakkad & Another High Court of Kerala
10-03-2020 The Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Chennai Outer, Chennai V/S The Glovis India Private Limited, F-98, Kancheepuram High Court of Judicature at Madras
04-03-2020 Vimal Versus Abbott healthcare Pvt. Ltd. & Others High Court of Madhya Pradesh Bench at Indore
21-02-2020 M/s. Hwashin Automative India Pvt. Ltd., Sriperumbudur Versus The Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, Poonamallee Division, (Not known as the Assistant Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Irungattukottai Division), Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
17-02-2020 M/s. Carenow Medical Prviate Limited, Rep. by its Director & the auth. Rep.T.Rajkumar Versus Rajesh Sodhi, The Principal Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Coimbatore High Court of Judicature at Madras
03-02-2020 M/s. Phoenix Rubbers, Palakkad, Represented By Sakkeer Hussain, Managing Partner Versus The Commercial Tax Officer, State GST Department, Palakkad & Others High Court of Kerala
03-02-2020 Sutherland Mortgage Services INC, Cochin, Represented by Achutarama Gupta Nesthala Vizupu, Authorized Signatory, V.K. Gupta Versus The Principal Commissioner, Office of The Principal Commissioner of Customs, Central GST & Central Excise, Kochi Commissionerate & Others High Court of Kerala
29-01-2020 Vimal Kumar Versus The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary/Industries Department, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
21-01-2020 M/s. Samrajyaa and Company, Represented by its Partner N. Ranganayaki Versus Deputy Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Office of the Principal Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Coimbatore High Court of Judicature at Madras
09-01-2020 ASL Builders Private Limited V/S Commissioner of Central GST & CX, Jamshedpur Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal East Zonal Bench Bench, Kolkata
06-01-2020 Asutosh & Another Versus Commercial Taxes Department (GST) & Others High Court of Madhya Pradesh Bench at Indore
27-11-2019 Dr. Vimal Vincent Versus Revenue Division Officer/Sub Collector, Revenue Divisional Office, Irijalakuda, Thrissur & Others High Court of Kerala
22-11-2019 BGR Energy Systems Limited, Represented by its Assistant Vice President Accounts, Chennai Versus The Additional Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Office of the Principal Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise, Nungambakkam, Chennai & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
15-11-2019 The Manager, Vimal Jyothi Engineering College, Kannur & Others Versus State of Kerala, Represented by Secretary, Local Self Government Department, Government Secretariat, Trivandrum & Others High Court of Kerala
04-11-2019 Vimal Singh Versus The State of Goa, through Police Inspector & Another In the High Court of Bombay at Goa
20-08-2019 M/s. Alkraft Thermotechnologies (Pvt.) Ltd., Ambattur Industrial Estate, Chennai, Rep. by Authorised Signatory, P. Sirajudeen Versus Commissioner of Central GST & Central Excise, Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
07-08-2019 The Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Chennai Outer Commissionerate Versus Intimate Fashions India (P) Ltd., Guduvancherry High Court of Judicature at Madras
24-07-2019 M/s. Premier Cotton Textiles, represented by its Senior Manager, S. Vaidyanathan, Poolankinar Post, Udumalpet Versus The Commissioner of Central Goods & Service Tax, Coimbatore Commissionerate, GST Bhavan, Coimbatore & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
22-07-2019 Vimal & Others Versus Santosh & Others High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench At Dharwad
17-07-2019 The New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Through its Manager (Legal Hub) Versus Vimal Babasaheb Hulgunde & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad
10-07-2019 Alkem Laboratories Ltd V/S Commissioner of GST And Central Excise, Daman High Court of Judicature at Bombay
04-07-2019 M/s. Ashok Leyland Ltd., (Formerly ‘M/s. Hinduja Foundries Ltd.'), Versus The Commissioner of G.S.T. & Central Excise, Chennai Customs Excise amp Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
26-06-2019 Girdhar Brijmohan Maru Versus Vimal Lalchand Mutha & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad
20-06-2019 The Commissioner of Central Excise, Now known as The Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Trichirapalli Versus M/s. Madras Cements Ltd., Ariyalur High Court of Judicature at Madras
19-06-2019 M/s. Sowmiya Spinners (P) Ltd., Coimbatore Versus The Superintendent, Office of the Superintendent of GST & Central Excise, Coimbatore District High Court of Judicature at Madras
28-05-2019 Vinod Kumar Vimal Versus The State of Bihar through Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna & Others High Court of Judicature at Patna
28-05-2019 Kerala Public Service Commission, Represented By Its Secretary, Thiruvananthapuram & Others Versus C.A. Vimal & Others High Court of Kerala
17-05-2019 M/s. Brandavan Food Products (A company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956), Chhattisgarh & Others Versus Commissioner (Appeals), Central & State Goods and Service Tax Raipur Commissionerate Central GST Building, Chhattisgarh & Another High Court of Chhattisgarh
13-05-2019 M/s. Rane Brake Lining Ltd. Versus The Commissioner of G.S.T. & Central Excise Customs Excise amp Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
07-05-2019 M/s. Shell India Markets Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Commissioner of G.S.T. & Central Excise Customs Excise amp Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
16-04-2019 Vimal Marwah Versus Logix Infratech Pvt. Ltd. National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
16-04-2019 M/s. Vendhar Movies, Represented by its Proprietor S. Madhan, Chennai & Others Versus The Joint Director, O/o. The Directorate General of GST Intelligence, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
04-04-2019 M/s. Paripooranam Steel Traders, Chennai Versus The Assistant Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
03-04-2019 M/S. Zentech Off-Shore Engineering Pvt. Ltd. Appellant Versus Commissioner of GST & CE, Chennai South Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
01-04-2019 V. Vimal Versus The District Collector, Cuddalore & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
18-03-2019 Vimal & Another Versus Deepak & Others High Court of Madhya Pradesh Bench at Indore
15-03-2019 M/s. Popular Maruthi Painting Works, Chennai Versus The Additional Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Chennai South Commissionerate, Chennai & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
13-03-2019 Vimal Kumar Sharma Versus State of Rajasthan High Court of Rajasthan Jaipur Bench
08-03-2019 M/s. Sri Ram Company Versus Commissioner of GST & CE, Madurai Customs Excise amp Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
05-03-2019 Shivangi Polysacks Pvt. Ltd. Versus CCE & GST, Jaipur (Rajasthan) Customs Excise amp Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
04-03-2019 Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Chennai & Another Versus M/s. Updater Services P. Ltd. & Another Customs Excise amp Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
05-02-2019 Shri Tirupathi Kumar Khemka Versus The Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise & GST, Chennai & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
29-01-2019 P. Prabhakar Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Government of India High Court of Judicature at Madras
28-01-2019 World Class Management Service Versus Commissioner of GST & CE Chennai South Commissionerate Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
16-01-2019 Vimal Tiwari Versus State of U.P. & Others High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
12-12-2018 Vimal Chaudhary Versus Manjeet Singh High Court of Rajasthan Jaipur Bench
06-12-2018 Kun Motor Co. Pvt. Ltd., Puducherry, Represented by Collin Elson, Sales Manager & Another Versus The Asst. State Tax Officer, Kerala State GST Department, Thiruvananthapuram & Another High Court of Kerala
26-11-2018 Vimal Jain Versus Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Others High Court of Delhi
22-11-2018 M/s. TMT. Granites (Pvt) Ltd. Palakkad, Represented by Its Managing Director, Tom George Versus The Commissioner, State GST Department, Trivandrum & Others High Court of Kerala
14-11-2018 M/s. Suryadev Alloys & Power Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Chennai Outer Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
14-11-2018 Reliance Cable Industries Versus Commissioner of GST (East) Delhi High Court of Delhi
13-11-2018 Vimal Kumar Soni Versus CPIO, Jawahar Navodaya Vidhyalaya Amreli, Amreli Central Information Commission
13-11-2018 Principal Commr. of Central Tax, GST, Delhi Versus Pymen Cable (India) High Court of Delhi
09-11-2018 M/s. SRF Ltd., Manali Versus The Commissioner of G.S.T. & Central Excise, Chennai North Commissionerate Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
01-11-2018 Vimal Chandrunwal Versus Brilliant Alloys P. Ltd. & Others National Company Law Tribunal Chennai
17-10-2018 Hitachi Home & Life Solutions (India) Ltd. & Another Versus Gomabai Netralaya, Neemuch Through Trusty, Vimal Goyal & Others Madya Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Bhopal
04-10-2018 City Union Bank Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Trichy Customs Excise amp Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
04-10-2018 Chief Post Master, Tehsil & District-Balaghat (M.P.) Versus Vimal Bothra Madya Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Bhopal
12-09-2018 Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Chennai Versus M/s. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. Customs Excise amp Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
10-09-2018 Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Versus Dymos India Automotive Private Limited High Court of Judicature at Madras
14-08-2018 Vimal Arackal Versus State of Kerala, Represented by The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam, Represented by Sub Inspector of Police, Kannamali Police Station & Another High Court of Kerala
24-07-2018 Andhra Organics Ltd V/S CCT, Visakhapatnam - G.S.T. Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Regional Bench Hyderabad
24-07-2018 Maxworth Plywood Pvt. Ltd V/S CCT, Visakhapatnam - G.S.T. Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Regional Bench Hyderabad
24-07-2018 Vijay Prestressed Products Pvt. Ltd V/S CCT, Visakhapatnam - G.S.T. Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Regional Bench, Allahabad
23-07-2018 Consim Info Pvt. Ltd V/S Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Chennai South Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
13-07-2018 M/s. Leo Oils & Lubricants Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Chennai North Commissionerate Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
13-07-2018 Alkraft Thermo Technologies Pvt. Ltd V/S Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Chennai North Commissionerate Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
13-07-2018 Terex India Pvt. Ltd V/S The Commissioner of G.S.T. & C.E., Salem Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
11-07-2018 Anuradha Sharma V/S Commissioner (Appeals), Customs GST and Central Excise, Lucknow Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Regional Bench Allahabad
10-07-2018 M/s. K. Bit Brave Sourcing Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Chennai Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
09-07-2018 Alkraft Thermotechnologies Pvt. Ltd V/S Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Chennai North Commissionerate Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
09-07-2018 Alkraft Thermotechnologies Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Chennai North Commissionerate Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
03-07-2018 Sparsha Logistics V/S CCT, Hyderabad G.S.T. Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Regional Bench Hyderabad
03-07-2018 Yona Smelters Pvt. Ltd V/S CCT, Visakhapatnam G.S.T. Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Regional Bench Hyderabad
02-07-2018 Fr. Thomas Melvettath, Chairman, Vimal Jyothi Engineering College, Kannur District Versus The All India Council for Technical Education, Nelson Mandela Marg, Vasaan Kunju, Represented By Its Member Secretary & Others High Court of Kerala
02-07-2018 Wipro Enterprises Ltd V/S The Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax, Tirupati-GST Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Regional Bench, Hyderabad
02-07-2018 Kasturi & Sons Ltd V/S Principal Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Chennai North Commissionerate Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
28-06-2018 Sentini Ceramica Pvt. Ltd V/S CCT, Guntur GST Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Regional Bench Hyderabad
20-06-2018 M/s. Deccan Park Resorts Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Coimbatore Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
18-06-2018 The Joint Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Office of the Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Trichy & Another Versus M/s. Cheran Cements Limited (DEFUNCT) Rep by its Authorized Signatory ? G. Duraisamy, Karur Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
05-06-2018 Chennai Ferrous Industries Ltd V/S Commissioner of GST & CCE (Chennai Outer Commissionerate) Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
04-06-2018 Hetero Labs. Limited V/S CCT, Hyderabad GST Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Regional Bench Hyderabad
04-06-2018 HCL Infosystems Ltd. Unit - III V/S Commissioner of GST & CCE, Pondicherry Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
21-05-2018 Mane India Private Limited V/S Commissioner of Central Tax, Central Excise & Service Tax, Medchal - GST Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Regional Bench Hyderabad
17-05-2018 Voith Turbo Private Limited V/S CCT, Secunderabad GST Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Regional Bench Hyderabad
15-05-2018 M/s. Kairali Granites, Represented by Its Proprietor, V.R Narayanan Embran Versus The Asst. State Tax Officer, State GST Department, Palakkad & Another High Court of Kerala
15-05-2018 Kohinoor Printers Pvt. Ltd. V/S GST & CCE, Chennai Outer Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
15-05-2018 Lakshmi Machine Works Ltd. V/S GST, CCE, Coimbatore Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
14-05-2018 Aditya Polysacks Pvt. Ltd V/S Commissioner of Centre Excise & GST, Jaipur Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
11-05-2018 Pioneer Hi Bred Private Limited V/S CCT, CE & ST, Medchal GST Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Regional Bench Hyderabad
09-05-2018 Qube Cinema Technologies Pvt. Ltd V/S GST & CCE, Chennai North Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
09-05-2018 M/s. Qube Cinema Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Versus GST & CCE, Chennai North Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
08-05-2018 R.N. Metal (India) Pvt. Limited and Others V/S CCE & GST, Jaipur Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal New Delhi
20-04-2018 Holtec Asia P. Ltd V/S Commissioner of Central Excise, GST Pune-I Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal West Zonal Bench At Mumbai
12-03-2018 Venkateswara Rao Bolla & Another Versus The Senior Intelligence Officer, Directorate General of GST Intelligence Rep. by Spl. Public Prosecutor In the High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad
06-03-2018 Wheels Tourists Operator V/S Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Chennai South Commissionerate Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai