Person chargeable with duty must be the importer at importation; subsequent purchasers cannot be held liable where beneficial owner rules did not appl...
A refund rejection must be supported by a reasoned and speaking order that deals with the taxpayer's material submissions; where the authority records no specific finding and ignores the reply, the rejection is vitiated for lack of application of mind. The High Court set aside the impugned refund order and corrigendum concerning unutilized input tax credit, and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication after issuance of a fresh show cause notice and grant of personal hearing. It also held that the subsequent notices for earlier financial years had been issued without considering the petitioner's submissions, so those notices were directed to be decided de novo, with the merits left open.
A refund rejection must be supported by a reasoned and speaking order that deals with the taxpayer's material submissions; where the authority records no specific finding and ignores the reply, the rejection is vitiated for lack of application of mind. The High Court set aside the impugned refund order and corrigendum concerning unutilized input tax credit, and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication after issuance of a fresh show cause notice and grant of personal hearing. It also held that the subsequent notices for earlier financial years had been issued without considering the petitioner's submissions, so those notices were directed to be decided de novo, with the merits left open.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4814 
Join Channel 
