<?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>2022 (9) TMI 483 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427538</link>
    <description>The Jharkhand HC dismissed a petition by a 100% EOU seeking refund of accumulated CGST, SGST and IGST credit for zero rated supplies. The petitioner claimed denial of personal hearing and violation of natural justice principles by the adjudicating authority. However, the HC found that despite being afforded personal hearing opportunities before both adjudicating and appellate authorities, the petitioner failed to produce documentary evidence supporting their zero rated supply claims. The court held that mere averments without corroborative documentary evidence are insufficient to substantiate refund claims, resulting in dismissal of the application.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 07 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 05 Apr 2025 13:49:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=690354" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (9) TMI 483 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427538</link>
      <description>The Jharkhand HC dismissed a petition by a 100% EOU seeking refund of accumulated CGST, SGST and IGST credit for zero rated supplies. The petitioner claimed denial of personal hearing and violation of natural justice principles by the adjudicating authority. However, the HC found that despite being afforded personal hearing opportunities before both adjudicating and appellate authorities, the petitioner failed to produce documentary evidence supporting their zero rated supply claims. The court held that mere averments without corroborative documentary evidence are insufficient to substantiate refund claims, resulting in dismissal of the application.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427538</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>