https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336610 The High Court held that a refund application for excess entry tax had to be reconsidered on merits after the earlier rejection was quashed and the matter remitted, and the respondent's failure to act within the time granted could not justify non-compliance with that direction. The pendency of proceedings on the validity of the entry tax legislation was held irrelevant because the petitioner was not challenging the statute itself, but seeking refund of tax allegedly paid from its own funds. The petitioner was entitled to a speaking order after being given a personal hearing, and the respondent was directed to reconsider the claim in accordance with law. en-us Thu, 01 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 26 Dec 2016 09:28:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336610 The High Court held that a refund application for excess entry tax had to be reconsidered on merits after the earlier rejection was quashed and the matter remitted, and the respondent's failure to act within the time granted could not justify non-compliance with that direction. The pendency of proceedings on the validity of the entry tax legislation was held irrelevant because the petitioner was not challenging the statute itself, but seeking refund of tax allegedly paid from its own funds. The petitioner was entitled to a speaking order after being given a personal hearing, and the respondent was directed to reconsider the claim in accordance with law. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 01 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336610