Search and seizure: abatement of earlier search bars use of prior seized material in later search-based assessments; relief limited to new documents f...
Admission of additional evidence under remand rules must await a meaningful remand report; failure to do so breaches natural justice and mandates rema...
Export Obligation Discharge Certificates for EPCG compliance cannot be questioned by Customs unless DGFT adjudicates and cancels them, so demands quas...
Page of 4811
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
6561 to 6580 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.