https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=398812 The court held that Section 54(3)(ii) of the CGST Act does not violate Article 14, and limiting refunds to credit accumulated from input goods is a valid classification. The court found the amended Rule 89(5) of the CGST Rules to be in conformity with Section 54(3)(ii) and within the rule-making power under Section 164. The petitions challenging the constitutional validity of Section 54(3)(ii) and the validity of Rule 89(5) were dismissed, and all related petitions were closed with no costs awarded. en-us Mon, 21 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 19 Mar 2025 17:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=398812 The court held that Section 54(3)(ii) of the CGST Act does not violate Article 14, and limiting refunds to credit accumulated from input goods is a valid classification. The court found the amended Rule 89(5) of the CGST Rules to be in conformity with Section 54(3)(ii) and within the rule-making power under Section 164. The petitions challenging the constitutional validity of Section 54(3)(ii) and the validity of Rule 89(5) were dismissed, and all related petitions were closed with no costs awarded. Case-Laws GST Mon, 21 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=398812