Clean slate principle extinguishes uncrystallised operational claims and bars continuation of pending recovery and arbitral proceedings after plan app...
Works contract classification governs composite layout-development contracts where VAT-paid goods are transferred alongside construction and infrastru...
Specified income tax exemption for pollution control body remains conditional on non-commercial activity, unchanged income character, and return filin...
Jurisdictional facts in certificate-of-origin discrepancies can support customs show-cause proceedings, leaving factual explanations for departmental ...
Dispute concerns recovery of funds erroneously transferred to a wrong beneficiary account and the applicability of CGST/WBGST provisions. HC examined bank report, affidavit of the added respondent and Ombudsman order, found transfer resulted from payers mistake (account digits mismatched) and that the unintended recipient disavowed any commercial relationship and consented to return the funds; consequently the bank was directed to credit the amount back to the payers account within one week. The operative effect is mandatory restitution of the mistakenly transferred amount by the bank to the payer.
Dispute concerns recovery of funds erroneously transferred to a wrong beneficiary account and the applicability of CGST/WBGST provisions. HC examined bank report, affidavit of the added respondent and Ombudsman order, found transfer resulted from payers mistake (account digits mismatched) and that the unintended recipient disavowed any commercial relationship and consented to return the funds; consequently the bank was directed to credit the amount back to the payers account within one week. The operative effect is mandatory restitution of the mistakenly transferred amount by the bank to the payer.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.