Revisionary jurisdiction under section 263 upheld; faceless assessments subject to revision when AO fails requisite enquiries, remitted for fresh asse...
Limited scope of processing under section 143(1): enhancement without show cause is unsustainable; remand for residency, taxation and TDS verification...
The HC held that exemption under Notification No. 2/2017 did not apply to the petitioner's supply of frozen meat, because the Rajasthan Authority for Advance Ruling and the appellate authority had already determined that the goods were supplied in unit containers and attracted GST at five per cent. Those advance rulings were binding on the petitioner under Section 103 of the CGST Act, so it was required to pay the tax accordingly. As the respondents rejected reimbursement only on the mistaken assumption that the supplies were exempt, there was no legal basis to deny reimbursement of the GST already paid. The petitioner was entitled to reimbursement of the balance GST amount, with interest payable on default.
The HC held that exemption under Notification No. 2/2017 did not apply to the petitioner's supply of frozen meat, because the Rajasthan Authority for Advance Ruling and the appellate authority had already determined that the goods were supplied in unit containers and attracted GST at five per cent. Those advance rulings were binding on the petitioner under Section 103 of the CGST Act, so it was required to pay the tax accordingly. As the respondents rejected reimbursement only on the mistaken assumption that the supplies were exempt, there was no legal basis to deny reimbursement of the GST already paid. The petitioner was entitled to reimbursement of the balance GST amount, with interest payable on default.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.