https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442008 The HC held that the petitioner was entitled to the refund claim made in the return for the quarter ending March 2014 without the need to file Form DVAT-21, as per Rule 34 and consistent with prior HC rulings. The respondents erred in adjusting Rs. 10,74,67,218 before disposal of objections by the OHA, violating Section 38 of the DVAT Act. The impugned order dated 31 May 2022 was quashed, and the respondents were directed to refund Rs. 6,62,74,405 with interest from the due date. The petition was allowed. en-us Mon, 21 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 11 Aug 2025 14:40:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442008 The HC held that the petitioner was entitled to the refund claim made in the return for the quarter ending March 2014 without the need to file Form DVAT-21, as per Rule 34 and consistent with prior HC rulings. The respondents erred in adjusting Rs. 10,74,67,218 before disposal of objections by the OHA, violating Section 38 of the DVAT Act. The impugned order dated 31 May 2022 was quashed, and the respondents were directed to refund Rs. 6,62,74,405 with interest from the due date. The petition was allowed. Case-Laws VAT / Sales Tax Mon, 21 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442008