Opportunity to respond to jurisdictional reports is mandatory before customs settlement duty enhancement; connected applications require consistent ad...
Specific customs headings for scaffolding components prevail over general classification, invalidating misclassification proceedings and enabling with...
Liquidator appointment under Section 34 requires consideration of creditor recommendations, valid professional authorisation, and preservation of vali...
Income-tax exemption for specified regulatory fees and government grants applies subject to non-commercial activity and continuing compliance conditio...
Digital accessibility audit and remediation deadlines extended, while all other disability-compliance obligations for regulated entities remain unchan...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
621 to 640 of 96047 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The High Court held that the provisions of GST enactments being applicable pan India, the department cannot take a contrary stand to the Supreme Court's ratio in Kusum Ingots & Alloys Ltd. versus Union of India. Therefore, the impugned order denying the benefit of refund on account of the Inverted Duty Structure to the petitioner is unsustainable. The impugned order was set aside, and the case was remitted back to the respondent to pass a fresh order sanctioning the refund to the petitioner within three months, in light of the mentioned orders. The petition was allowed by way of remand.
The High Court held that the provisions of GST enactments being applicable pan India, the department cannot take a contrary stand to the Supreme Court's ratio in Kusum Ingots & Alloys Ltd. versus Union of India. Therefore, the impugned order denying the benefit of refund on account of the Inverted Duty Structure to the petitioner is unsustainable. The impugned order was set aside, and the case was remitted back to the respondent to pass a fresh order sanctioning the refund to the petitioner within three months, in light of the mentioned orders. The petition was allowed by way of remand.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.