Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Page of 4801
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
341 to 360 of 96001 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
100% EOU wrongly claimed refund u/r 96 instead of Rule 89 of CGST Rules, 2017 on IGST paid on inputs/capital goods utilized for exports. HC held EOU entitled to exemption u/r 89 as exports made and refund claims based on shipping bills. Procedural irregularity should not obstruct legitimate export incentives. Impugned order set aside, matter remitted to pass fresh order examining exports for granting refund u/r 89 and Section 16(3) of IGST Act, 2017.
100% EOU wrongly claimed refund u/r 96 instead of Rule 89 of CGST Rules, 2017 on IGST paid on inputs/capital goods utilized for exports. HC held EOU entitled to exemption u/r 89 as exports made and refund claims based on shipping bills. Procedural irregularity should not obstruct legitimate export incentives. Impugned order set aside, matter remitted to pass fresh order examining exports for granting refund u/r 89 and Section 16(3) of IGST Act, 2017.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.