Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Page of 4801
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
341 to 360 of 96001 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The HC held that the petitioner was entitled to the CGST refund despite citation of an incorrect provision or typographical errors in the refund application forms. Such technical defects cannot justify rejection of the substantive claim. The appellate authority erred in law by dismissing the refund on this ground without adjudicating the claim on merits. Further, the adverse finding against the petitioner for failure to adduce evidence was passed without issuing a proper show cause notice or affording an opportunity of hearing, thus violating principles of natural justice. Consequently, the impugned orders were quashed, and the matter was remitted to the appellate authority for fresh determination in accordance with the observations. The petition was allowed by way of remand.
The HC held that the petitioner was entitled to the CGST refund despite citation of an incorrect provision or typographical errors in the refund application forms. Such technical defects cannot justify rejection of the substantive claim. The appellate authority erred in law by dismissing the refund on this ground without adjudicating the claim on merits. Further, the adverse finding against the petitioner for failure to adduce evidence was passed without issuing a proper show cause notice or affording an opportunity of hearing, thus violating principles of natural justice. Consequently, the impugned orders were quashed, and the matter was remitted to the appellate authority for fresh determination in accordance with the observations. The petition was allowed by way of remand.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.