Proportionate interest, unexplained credits and partner remuneration disputed; proofs of fund nexus and lender identity were decisive and disallowance...
Capital gains valuation from stamp assessment versus net consideration for residential reinvestment: deemed stamp value replaced for gains but not for...
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.