https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=421087 The HC directed respondent authorities to re-credit Rs.1,39,49,810 to the applicant's electronic credit ledger within two weeks. The court found that the applicant had imported raw material under an advance license (duty-free), exported finished goods, paid IGST then claimed refund, but inadvertently used ITC to pay IGST and later repaid the refunded IGST with interest. The HC held the dispute concerned restoration of ITC-not a prohibited refund under rule 96(10) CGST Rules-and ordered restoration of the erroneously reduced input tax credit. en-us Thu, 07 Apr 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 02 Sep 2025 14:29:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=421087 The HC directed respondent authorities to re-credit Rs.1,39,49,810 to the applicant's electronic credit ledger within two weeks. The court found that the applicant had imported raw material under an advance license (duty-free), exported finished goods, paid IGST then claimed refund, but inadvertently used ITC to pay IGST and later repaid the refunded IGST with interest. The HC held the dispute concerned restoration of ITC-not a prohibited refund under rule 96(10) CGST Rules-and ordered restoration of the erroneously reduced input tax credit. Case-Laws GST Thu, 07 Apr 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=421087