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>Government Cannot Double Taxation on Ocean Freight by Imposing Additional IGST Beyond CIF Contract Value</h1> <h3>Rawmet Resources (P) Ltd., rep. By its General Manager, Sanjay Kumar Behura. Versus Union Of India, Rep. By The Secretary And 2 Ors.</h3> Rawmet Resources (P) Ltd., rep. By its General Manager, Sanjay Kumar Behura. Versus Union Of India, Rep. By The Secretary And 2 Ors. - TMI Issues:1. Interpretation of legislative competency and constitutionality regarding the imposition of IGST on ocean freight in case of CIF Contracts.2. Validity of imposing IGST on ocean freight when IGST has already been paid on CIF value.3. Process and timeline for the Petitioner to apply for refund and the obligation of the Respondents to process the application.Analysis:1. The judgment addresses the issue of legislative competency and constitutionality concerning the imposition of IGST on ocean freight in CIF Contracts. The court declares that further imposition of IGST on ocean freight lacks legislative competency and is ultra vires to the IGST Act, 2017, hence unconstitutional. The court makes the rule absolute in terms of the prayer clauses related to this issue.2. The judgment also examines the validity of imposing IGST on ocean freight when IGST has already been paid on CIF value. The court rules that the payment of IGST on ocean freight again is not payable when IGST has already been paid on CIF value. The court makes the rule absolute in terms of the prayer clauses related to this issue as well.3. Regarding the process and timeline for the Petitioner to apply for a refund, the judgment allows the Petitioner to apply for a refund, which will be processed in accordance with the law within eight weeks from the date of its receipt. The court directs the concerned Respondents to dispose of the refund application as expeditiously as possible, not later than eight weeks from the date of its receipt. The petition is disposed of with no order for costs, concluding the legal proceedings comprehensively.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
