Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to refund of IGST paid on ocean freight pursuant to the impugned notifications after the notifications had been held ultra vires, and whether the respondents were required to accept the fresh refund application and grant refund with interest.
Analysis: The levy on ocean freight under Notification No. 8/2017 dated 28.6.2017 and Notification No. 10/2017 dated 28.6.2017, together with the corrigendum dated 30.6.2017, had already been declared unconstitutional and ultra vires. The validity of that levy was no longer open, and the same legal position governed the petitioner's refund claim. In these circumstances, the refund claim could not be denied on the basis of the impugned levy, and the competent authority was required to verify the amount and process refund with statutory interest. The respondents were also directed to accept the physical copy of the fresh application.
Conclusion: The petitioner was held entitled to refund of the IGST paid on ocean freight, along with statutory interest, and the respondents were directed to process the refund and accept the fresh application.
Ratio Decidendi: Once the levy imposed by the notifications had been declared ultra vires, tax collected under that levy became refundable with statutory interest upon proper verification.