https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448030 The availability of an alternative remedy did not bar writ jurisdiction where the dispute involved contested facts, and the issue had already been settled in the petitioners' favour in an earlier decision affirmed by the Supreme Court. The Court further held that reimbursement of GST paid on street-light maintenance was payable because the service was a composite supply of goods and maintenance work, not a pure service covered by the exemption notification. On that basis, the respondents' refusal to reimburse the tax was unlawful, and the petitioners were entitled to reimbursement with interest at 9% from 01.07.2017. en-us Thu, 23 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 25 Apr 2025 13:09:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448030 The availability of an alternative remedy did not bar writ jurisdiction where the dispute involved contested facts, and the issue had already been settled in the petitioners' favour in an earlier decision affirmed by the Supreme Court. The Court further held that reimbursement of GST paid on street-light maintenance was payable because the service was a composite supply of goods and maintenance work, not a pure service covered by the exemption notification. On that basis, the respondents' refusal to reimburse the tax was unlawful, and the petitioners were entitled to reimbursement with interest at 9% from 01.07.2017. Case-Laws GST Thu, 23 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448030