Bona fide disclosure requirements govern under-reporting penalties, and post-penalty immunity applications cannot secure available statutory protectio...
Certificate-of-origin verification procedure governs preferential customs benefits; denial without retroactive verification was set aside with consequ...
Disciplinary Committee jurisdiction and mandatory investigation requirements invalidated cancellation of an insolvency professional's registration and...
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 
TaxTMI 
of 4807 
Join Channel 
