Scope of judicial review under Article 226: supervisory, not appellate; factual reappraisal barred, challenge dismissed; insolvency professional dutie...
Courier transshipment of imported goods via named carrier to air cargo stations renewed until 30.01.2026; exemption conditional, strict controls apply...
Insurer's investment gains and investment write-downs face Section 263 revision; enquiry upheld, Rule 5(b)(ii) lapse sustained, late corrigendum quash...
Whether supply of electricity by the petitioner to an intermediary for onward supply outside India qualified as "export of goods" (zero-rated) for IGST refund was decided by construing Article 286(1)(b) and Sections 2(5) and 16 of the IGST Act. Since the petitioner had no privity of contract with the foreign buyer and title passed at the domestic delivery point from the petitioner to the intermediary, the petitioner's supply was only "for export" and not an export supply; consequently, it was a domestic supply and not eligible for zero-rated refund on that leg. The petitions were dismissed, with liberty to refile refund claims applying Rule 89 treating the intermediary supply as domestic. - HC
Whether supply of electricity by the petitioner to an intermediary for onward supply outside India qualified as "export of goods" (zero-rated) for IGST refund was decided by construing Article 286(1)(b) and Sections 2(5) and 16 of the IGST Act. Since the petitioner had no privity of contract with the foreign buyer and title passed at the domestic delivery point from the petitioner to the intermediary, the petitioner's supply was only "for export" and not an export supply; consequently, it was a domestic supply and not eligible for zero-rated refund on that leg. The petitions were dismissed, with liberty to refile refund claims applying Rule 89 treating the intermediary supply as domestic. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4816 
Join Channel 
