Joint development agreements defer taxable transfer where possession lacks part performance, while completed flats determine consideration and exempti...
Passenger baggage re-export requires true declaration and cannot be granted indirectly through discretionary redemption of undeclared prohibited goods...
The HC set aside the impugned orders dated 23 June 2020 and 18 August 2021 and remitted the matter for fresh adjudication on the refund application under s.54(3) of the CGST Act, noting that Rule 90(3)'s validity relative to s.54(3) and the limitation computation issue warranted reconsideration. The proper officer is directed to decide the application de novo after considering the Gujarat HC decision and any authorities the Petitioner wishes to rely upon, to afford a personal hearing, and to pass a reasoned order. Disposal must occur expeditiously and, in any event, within three months of the Petitioner filing an authenticated copy of this order with supporting authorities. Petition disposed.
The HC set aside the impugned orders dated 23 June 2020 and 18 August 2021 and remitted the matter for fresh adjudication on the refund application under s.54(3) of the CGST Act, noting that Rule 90(3)'s validity relative to s.54(3) and the limitation computation issue warranted reconsideration. The proper officer is directed to decide the application de novo after considering the Gujarat HC decision and any authorities the Petitioner wishes to rely upon, to afford a personal hearing, and to pass a reasoned order. Disposal must occur expeditiously and, in any event, within three months of the Petitioner filing an authenticated copy of this order with supporting authorities. Petition disposed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.