Appellate jurisdiction over baggage imports is excluded, requiring confiscation challenges involving passenger-carried gold to proceed by statutory re...
Article 227 review permits intervention in arbitration only for manifest, patent inherent jurisdictional defects, not representational authority dispu...
Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules restricted IGST refunds on exports in specified circumstances. The High Court's earlier ruling in M/s Hikal Limited treated the rule as ultra vires section 16 of the IGST Act and manifestly arbitrary. Its subsequent omission without a saving clause meant that proceedings based exclusively on an alleged breach of Rule 96(10) could not continue. Accordingly, a show cause notice seeking to deny or recover an IGST export refund under that rule, along with consequential proceedings, was quashed.
Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules restricted IGST refunds on exports in specified circumstances. The High Court's earlier ruling in M/s Hikal Limited treated the rule as ultra vires section 16 of the IGST Act and manifestly arbitrary. Its subsequent omission without a saving clause meant that proceedings based exclusively on an alleged breach of Rule 96(10) could not continue. Accordingly, a show cause notice seeking to deny or recover an IGST export refund under that rule, along with consequential proceedings, was quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
