Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
HC held that the petitioners, being 100% EOUs making zero-rated supplies under LUT, are exporters and not "deemed exporters" under s.2(39) r/w s.147 of the GST Act. Since their suppliers treated supplies as regular B2B and did not follow deemed export procedure or claim deemed export benefits, para 2.2 of Circular No. 172/04/2022-GST and Rule 89(4A) are inapplicable. The petitioners correctly claimed refund of unutilised ITC under s.54(3) r/w Rule 89(1)/89(4). The authorities' reliance on the Circular with retrospective effect and exercise of suo motu review under s.107(2) to deny or revisit sanctioned refunds was held unsustainable. The HC allowed the petitions, restoring the refund claims of unutilised ITC.
HC held that the petitioners, being 100% EOUs making zero-rated supplies under LUT, are exporters and not "deemed exporters" under s.2(39) r/w s.147 of the GST Act. Since their suppliers treated supplies as regular B2B and did not follow deemed export procedure or claim deemed export benefits, para 2.2 of Circular No. 172/04/2022-GST and Rule 89(4A) are inapplicable. The petitioners correctly claimed refund of unutilised ITC under s.54(3) r/w Rule 89(1)/89(4). The authorities' reliance on the Circular with retrospective effect and exercise of suo motu review under s.107(2) to deny or revisit sanctioned refunds was held unsustainable. The HC allowed the petitions, restoring the refund claims of unutilised ITC.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
