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 rejection of budgetary support for the period July 2017 to September 2017 was sustainable, and whether the claims were required to be reconsidered on the basis of monthly computation though the applications were to be filed quarterly.
Analysis: The scheme under the notification dated 05-10-2017 required claims to be filed on a quarterly basis, but the reasoning adopted in the later clarification and in the analogous Jammu and Kashmir decision showed that reimbursement could still be worked out with reference to monthly tax payment figures after adjustment of input tax credit. The Court also took note of the Central Board's circular permitting month-wise details to be attached for verification and held that the subsequent departmental stand could not prevail over the judicially accepted method of computation. In view of the principle of judicial comity, the earlier directions in the similar matter were treated as relevant and persuasive for the present claim.
Conclusion: The rejection of the claim for July 2017 to September 2017 was set aside and the matter was remitted for reconsideration on the same terms as the analogous decision.
Final Conclusion: The assessee obtained relief by way of setting aside of the adverse orders and a direction for fresh consideration of the disputed budgetary support claim.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a budgetary support scheme requires quarterly filing but the reimbursement formula is linked to monthly tax payment and input tax credit adjustment, the claim may be recomputed on monthly figures and reconsidered accordingly; a later administrative clarification cannot defeat that approach where judicial comity requires consistency with a prior binding determination in a similar scheme.