Assessment time-barred u/s 153 due to missing competent-authority reference for Singapore exchange of information; assessment disallowed as barred by ...
Imported menthol-scented sweet supari classification dispute: seizure quashed, release for home consumption subject to duty bond; bank guarantee refus...
CKD/SKD air-conditioner components classifiable with finished units by essential character; prior advance ruling extended three years, FTA benefits po...
Scope of judicial review under Article 226: supervisory, not appellate; factual reappraisal barred, challenge dismissed; insolvency professional dutie...
Refund under the inverted duty structure was denied by applying paragraph 2(2) of a circular restricting eligibility for refund applications filed after 13.07.2022. Relying on a coordinate bench ruling, the court held that paragraph 2(2) of Circular No. 181/13/2022-GST was ultra vires Section 54(3) of the CGST/GGST Act and violative of Article 14, and therefore could not govern refund adjudication; consequently, the impugned refund rejection and appellate order were quashed, the matter was remanded, and the proper officer was directed to reprocess the refund in accordance with law within 12 weeks. - HC
Refund under the inverted duty structure was denied by applying paragraph 2(2) of a circular restricting eligibility for refund applications filed after 13.07.2022. Relying on a coordinate bench ruling, the court held that paragraph 2(2) of Circular No. 181/13/2022-GST was ultra vires Section 54(3) of the CGST/GGST Act and violative of Article 14, and therefore could not govern refund adjudication; consequently, the impugned refund rejection and appellate order were quashed, the matter was remanded, and the proper officer was directed to reprocess the refund in accordance with law within 12 weeks. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4826 
Join Channel 
