Misdeclaration of quantity rejected where supplier evidence established counting errors, so reassessment, confiscation and redemption fine were set as...
Admissibility of electronic evidence controls valuation and penalty exposure; non compliant e records and statements nullify revaluation and penalties...
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 
TaxTMI 
of 4816 
Join Channel 
