Mis-declaration and Concealment: confiscation affirmed, transaction value re-determined and mandatory penalty sustained; redemption allowed on payment...
Page of 4811
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
5561 to 5580 of 96208 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Section 54(8)(e) of the CGST Act excludes from fund credit any refundable amount that was not passed on by the taxpayer; because the respondent admitted passing the tax burden to consumers, that exception did not apply and the refund could not be paid to consumers under the provision. The High Court nevertheless accepted a taxpayer proposal to deposit the refunded sum into a designated account and seek tariff reductions to benefit consumers-a procedure not provided by Section 54 or its Rules, impracticable to implement and legally impermissible. The High Court order creating this judicially fashioned refund mechanism was set aside.
Section 54(8)(e) of the CGST Act excludes from fund credit any refundable amount that was not passed on by the taxpayer; because the respondent admitted passing the tax burden to consumers, that exception did not apply and the refund could not be paid to consumers under the provision. The High Court nevertheless accepted a taxpayer proposal to deposit the refunded sum into a designated account and seek tariff reductions to benefit consumers-a procedure not provided by Section 54 or its Rules, impracticable to implement and legally impermissible. The High Court order creating this judicially fashioned refund mechanism was set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4811 
Join Channel 
