Introducing the βIn Favour Ofβ filter in Case Laws.
- βοΈ Instantly identify judgments decided in favour of the Assessee, Revenue, or Appellant
- π Narrow down results with higher precision
Try it now in Case Laws β


Just a moment...
Introducing the βIn Favour Ofβ filter in Case Laws.
Try it now in Case Laws β


Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Don't have an account? Register Here
The Punjab and Haryana High Court addressed the denial of refund of excess tax paid by contractors under the Haryana Alternative Tax Compliance Scheme for Contractors, 2016. The court examined the Constitutional Validity of Clause 4(2) of the scheme and found that it created unjust enrichment in favor of the Revenue, disadvantaging contractors who had been regularly paying taxes. Referring to CORPORATION BANK VERSUS SARASWATI ABHARANSALA, the court emphasized that excess tax must be refunded unless it involves unjust enrichment. The court quashed the orders denying refund, ruling in favor of the petitioners and directing payment of refund with interest within four weeks, with additional interest at 9% if delayed. Petition allowed.