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 under Entry No. 10 of Notification No. 10/2017-IGST (Rate) dated 28.6.2017, in view of the earlier declaration that the notification was ultra vires and unconstitutional.
Analysis: The issue was already covered by the earlier decision invalidating the relevant IGST notifications on the ground that they lacked legislative competence. The Court treated the challenge as no longer res integra and noted that the impugned levy on ocean freight had already been declared unconstitutional. In view of that binding determination, the respondents' liability to refund the tax already collected from the petitioner followed.
Conclusion: The petitioner was held entitled to refund of the IGST paid under the impugned notification, and the respondents were directed to sanction and pay the amount within the stipulated time.