<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2006 (1) TMI 556 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162048</link>
    <description>Refund of excess trade tax is treated as mandatory under the U.P. Trade Tax Act where the underlying assessment is set aside, and an express refund direction in the appellate order is not a prerequisite. The statutory refund scheme and restitution principles require repayment of excess collections, subject to the doctrine of unjust enrichment, and delayed refund attracts statutory interest. The note also records that the claimant must establish that the disputed sums were actually deposited on its behalf for the relevant assessment years; contemporaneous challans and correspondence may suffice, while any amount already refunded or credited elsewhere cannot be counted again.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 14 Feb 2014 18:26:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=346026" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (1) TMI 556 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162048</link>
      <description>Refund of excess trade tax is treated as mandatory under the U.P. Trade Tax Act where the underlying assessment is set aside, and an express refund direction in the appellate order is not a prerequisite. The statutory refund scheme and restitution principles require repayment of excess collections, subject to the doctrine of unjust enrichment, and delayed refund attracts statutory interest. The note also records that the claimant must establish that the disputed sums were actually deposited on its behalf for the relevant assessment years; contemporaneous challans and correspondence may suffice, while any amount already refunded or credited elsewhere cannot be counted again.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162048</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>