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...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
The HC held that the impugned IGST levy on ocean freight under the reverse-charge notifications was ultra vires and contrary to the GST scheme, requiring refund of Rs. 2,62,37,558 paid by the Petitioner; the Respondents have refunded that amount. The petition further succeeded in claiming interest of Rs. 71,31,225, which the HC directed the Respondents to pay forthwith and in any event within four weeks of judgment. The court clarified that Sections 54/56 were inapplicable to the initial unlawful collection, but nonetheless sanctioned the quantified interest on the merits. Petition disposed.
The HC held that the impugned IGST levy on ocean freight under the reverse-charge notifications was ultra vires and contrary to the GST scheme, requiring refund of Rs. 2,62,37,558 paid by the Petitioner; the Respondents have refunded that amount. The petition further succeeded in claiming interest of Rs. 71,31,225, which the HC directed the Respondents to pay forthwith and in any event within four weeks of judgment. The court clarified that Sections 54/56 were inapplicable to the initial unlawful collection, but nonetheless sanctioned the quantified interest on the merits. Petition disposed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.