Timing mismatch in income recognition requires verification whether receipts were already taxed in an earlier year; matter remitted for fresh examinat...
Authorities under the GST regime cannot disregard a binding High Court declaration on SEZ refund claims merely because the issue has been taken to the Supreme Court; the law declared in Britannia continued to apply until displaced by a contrary High Court or Supreme Court ruling. On that basis, the refund rejection and appellate orders were unsustainable insofar as they refused to follow Britannia. The Court also noted that the question whether the services were for authorised operations, supported by the specified officer's endorsement, had not been adjudicated below and required fresh examination. The matter was remanded to the Assistant Commissioner for reconsideration in accordance with law.
Authorities under the GST regime cannot disregard a binding High Court declaration on SEZ refund claims merely because the issue has been taken to the Supreme Court; the law declared in Britannia continued to apply until displaced by a contrary High Court or Supreme Court ruling. On that basis, the refund rejection and appellate orders were unsustainable insofar as they refused to follow Britannia. The Court also noted that the question whether the services were for authorised operations, supported by the specified officer's endorsement, had not been adjudicated below and required fresh examination. The matter was remanded to the Assistant Commissioner for reconsideration in accordance with law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
