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>Tax Authorities Cannot Unilaterally Nullify Prior Judicial Orders, Original Bench Mandated to Review Challenge Under Section 264</h1> <h3>S Mahendrakumar Devichand Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors., Commissioner of CGST & C. Ex. Mumbai Central, The Union of India & Ors</h3> S Mahendrakumar Devichand Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors., Commissioner of CGST & C. Ex. Mumbai Central, The Union of India & Ors - 2024 (82) ... Issues involved: The nullification of orders passed by the High Court by the Deputy Commissioner of State Tax and the subsequent show cause notice issued to the petitioner for rejecting the refund claim.Judgment Summary:Issue 1: Nullification of High Court OrdersThe petitioner's grievance was that the Deputy Commissioner of State Tax intended to deny the benefits of the High Court order directing a refund to the petitioner. The Court observed that the Deputy Commissioner's actions seemed to nullify the High Court orders, effectively sitting in appeal over them. The Court noted that the Deputy Commissioner had issued a show cause notice calling for a refund claim to be rejected, which was peculiar and raised concerns about the authority's approach. The Court emphasized that such actions should not be allowed as they undermine the authority of the High Court.Issue 2: Review Application by the DepartmentThe Department had filed an Interim Application for review/modification/clarification of the High Court order. The Court acknowledged the Department's right to seek a review but stated that the contentions raised by the petitioner could only be addressed after the review application was decided. The Court directed that the review application would be heard by the same Bench that passed the original order. The petitioner was allowed to move a praecipe for the writ petition to be tagged along with the review application.Additional ObservationThe Court clarified that its present order did not prevent the Department from restoring the position regarding the input tax credit as directed in the original High Court orders. The Deputy Commissioner was instructed not to take further steps under the show cause notice issued to the petitioner. The Court granted liberty to apply for any further necessary actions.This judgment highlights the importance of upholding High Court orders and ensuring that administrative authorities do not undermine or overrule judicial decisions. It also emphasizes the procedural aspects of review applications and the need for consistency in legal proceedings.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
