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>Petitioner Awaits Input Tax Credit Refund for FY 2017-18; Authorities Directed to Issue Orders in Four Weeks</h1> <h3>IHS Global Private Limited Versus Union of India and others</h3> In the case before the P&H HC, the petitioner sought a refund of Input Tax Credit for the financial year 2017-18. Despite applications and responses ... Refund of Input Tax Credit on account of export of services without payment of tax - petitioner fairly submits that as and when the petitioner is required to furnish any material, it shall do the needful, without any delay - HELD THAT:- This Court is sanguine that the authorities shall look into the matter in the right earnest. And the appropriate orders shall be passed within the time indicated by learned counsel for the respondents. Application disposed off. In the case before the Punjab and Haryana High Court, the petitioner, IHS Global Private Limited, sought a refund of Input Tax Credit amounting to Rs.94,71,285/- for the financial year 2017-18, related to the export of IT/ITeS services without payment of tax under Section 54 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act. Despite submitting an application on 27.06.2019 and responding to a show cause notice issued on 23.08.2021, the petitioner claimed that there had been no progress in their refund claim, impairing their interests and rights. The petitioner had also made multiple representations to the respondent authorities without receiving a response.The respondent's counsel stated that the competent authority was handling the matter and suggested the petition be disposed of to allow the authorities to pass necessary orders in accordance with the law. They also indicated that the petitioner might need to provide additional documents relevant to the issue.The petitioner's counsel agreed to furnish any required materials promptly and requested a timeline for the decision. The respondent's counsel assured that appropriate orders would be issued within four weeks.The court disposed of the petition, emphasizing that the authorities should address the matter earnestly and issue orders within the specified timeframe. The order did not express any opinion on the merits of the case, leaving the competent authority to examine the petitioner's concerns strictly according to the law.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
