Unlawful outward remittances via Hawala using proforma invoices and electronic records proved; documents admitted, directors penalised, penalties redu...
Attachment of equivalent-value properties as proceeds of crime upheld; preventive attachment order and confirmation sustained; no independent ED reinv...
Broker trading-system "technical glitch" redefinition and narrowed incident-reporting regime for large IBT/STWT brokers requiring 2-hr notice and 14-w...
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.