Specialized Investment Fund distribution now requires dedicated certification, while transitional recognition preserves existing qualified distributor...
Overlapping GST proceedings require Central and State authorities to designate one competent authority for coordinated adjudication of the same matter...
Composite healthcare supplies retain exemption when patient care is the contract's essential character, despite payment through an implementing agency...
HC allowed the petitioner's refund claim, holding that the rejection of Rs. 1,678/- for July-September 2021 and Rs. 7,170/- for January-March 2022 quarters was improper. The court determined that the budgetary support calculation under the scheme was correctly applied, with entitlement calculated at 58% of central tax paid through cash ledger and 29% of IGST paid. The respondent was directed to release the inadmissible amounts in accordance with the notification dated 05.10.2017, effectively granting the petitioner's full refund claim.
HC allowed the petitioner's refund claim, holding that the rejection of Rs. 1,678/- for July-September 2021 and Rs. 7,170/- for January-March 2022 quarters was improper. The court determined that the budgetary support calculation under the scheme was correctly applied, with entitlement calculated at 58% of central tax paid through cash ledger and 29% of IGST paid. The respondent was directed to release the inadmissible amounts in accordance with the notification dated 05.10.2017, effectively granting the petitioner's full refund claim.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
