Pre-existing operational debt disputes require genuine evidence, while undirected running-account payments may be appropriated on a first-in-first-out...
Agency in CNG distribution makes outlet operators commission agents, rendering taxable Business Auxiliary Service rather than purchasing goods for res...
Composite inpatient healthcare supply may retain exemption despite MRP medicine billing, while separate taxable sale characterisation remains disputed...
The HC allowed the writ appeal, set aside the Single-Member bench decision and ruled for the Revenue. The court held that refunds under section 49(6) are permissive only "in accordance with" section 54, and do not independently entitle a taxpayer to refund accumulated input tax credit (ITC) on discontinuance or disposals unless statutory preconditions are met. The respondent failed to plead or prove reversal of accumulated credit under section 29(5) and did not establish entitlement under section 54 or applicable rules. Consequently the writ was held not maintainable and no constitutional or statutory violation was made out entitling to the claimed refund.
The HC allowed the writ appeal, set aside the Single-Member bench decision and ruled for the Revenue. The court held that refunds under section 49(6) are permissive only "in accordance with" section 54, and do not independently entitle a taxpayer to refund accumulated input tax credit (ITC) on discontinuance or disposals unless statutory preconditions are met. The respondent failed to plead or prove reversal of accumulated credit under section 29(5) and did not establish entitlement under section 54 or applicable rules. Consequently the writ was held not maintainable and no constitutional or statutory violation was made out entitling to the claimed refund.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
