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 upheld the refund claim, ruling that the tax department cannot withhold the refund based solely on Section 54(11) opinion when no appeal challenges the Appellate Authority's order. The court emphasized that in the absence of a stay or pending review, the refund must be processed. The decision aligns with precedent that an administrative opinion cannot override a valid appellate order, particularly when no legal challenge exists. The refund shall be processed with potential interest for delayed payment, with the understanding that any future successful appeal would retrospectively bind the parties.
HC upheld the refund claim, ruling that the tax department cannot withhold the refund based solely on Section 54(11) opinion when no appeal challenges the Appellate Authority's order. The court emphasized that in the absence of a stay or pending review, the refund must be processed. The decision aligns with precedent that an administrative opinion cannot override a valid appellate order, particularly when no legal challenge exists. The refund shall be processed with potential interest for delayed payment, with the understanding that any future successful appeal would retrospectively bind the parties.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
