Minimum Import Price restrictions for Black Pepper, Areca-nuts and Apples upheld; procedural laying failure not fatal, notifications to be placed befo...
Transaction value between related persons requires market-equivalent pricing; importer must prove declared value mirrors ordinary international trade ...
Classification of exported insecticides under export tariff affirmed; reclassification and related penalties set aside and MEIS scrip jurisdiction rec...
Misclassification between copra and dry coconut: customs recovery and re-valuation quashed for lack of prior licensing-authority invalidation, appeals...
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.