Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
The HC directed the refund of IGST paid under Section 16(3) of IGST Act read with Section 54 of CGST Act and Rule 96 of CGST Rules for zero-rated supply. The court determined that departmental circulars cannot override Rule 96, relying on precedent established in Amit Cotton Industries (Gujarat HC). The court ordered the respondent to refund Rs. 12,72,827 with applicable interest to the petitioner within eight weeks from receipt of the order. The petition was allowed, confirming that administrative circulars cannot supersede statutory rules governing IGST refund procedures for zero-rated supplies.
The HC directed the refund of IGST paid under Section 16(3) of IGST Act read with Section 54 of CGST Act and Rule 96 of CGST Rules for zero-rated supply. The court determined that departmental circulars cannot override Rule 96, relying on precedent established in Amit Cotton Industries (Gujarat HC). The court ordered the respondent to refund Rs. 12,72,827 with applicable interest to the petitioner within eight weeks from receipt of the order. The petition was allowed, confirming that administrative circulars cannot supersede statutory rules governing IGST refund procedures for zero-rated supplies.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
