Retroactive interim-moratorium exclusion permits protective asset disclosure and preservation measures against personal guarantors pending arbitration...
Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
The High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the Tribunal's order allowing the assessee to claim refund of Rs. 3,28,75,733/- towards Central Value Added Tax credit, Customs Duty, and Special Additional Duty paid after the appointed day under the CGST Act. The Tribunal rightly relied on Section 142(3) of the CGST Act to entertain the refund claim for amounts paid under the existing law prior to the GST regime, despite non-fulfillment of export obligation under the advance authorization scheme. The High Court found no perversity in the Tribunal's legal interpretation and conclusion.
The High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the Tribunal's order allowing the assessee to claim refund of Rs. 3,28,75,733/- towards Central Value Added Tax credit, Customs Duty, and Special Additional Duty paid after the appointed day under the CGST Act. The Tribunal rightly relied on Section 142(3) of the CGST Act to entertain the refund claim for amounts paid under the existing law prior to the GST regime, despite non-fulfillment of export obligation under the advance authorization scheme. The High Court found no perversity in the Tribunal's legal interpretation and conclusion.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4801
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
