<?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>High Court Expands Exemption Scope u/s 8(5)(b) of CST Act; Clarifies Refunds Require Proof of Unjust Enrichment.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=78755</link>
    <description>The High Court addressed the power to grant exemptions u/s 8(5)(b) of the CST Act, ruling that it extends beyond &quot;registered dealers&quot; to include other specified categories. This interpretation was supported by previous judgments. The Court also discussed unjust enrichment, stating that refunds are not automatic unless it&#039;s proven that tax liability wasn&#039;t passed on to consumers. The decision referenced a Supreme Court case emphasizing that the tax component is typically included in the final product cost. Ultimately, the Court upheld the original judgment, dismissing the revision petitions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 24 Jun 2024 08:10:35 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 24 Jun 2024 08:10:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=757289" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>High Court Expands Exemption Scope u/s 8(5)(b) of CST Act; Clarifies Refunds Require Proof of Unjust Enrichment.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=78755</link>
      <description>The High Court addressed the power to grant exemptions u/s 8(5)(b) of the CST Act, ruling that it extends beyond &quot;registered dealers&quot; to include other specified categories. This interpretation was supported by previous judgments. The Court also discussed unjust enrichment, stating that refunds are not automatic unless it&#039;s proven that tax liability wasn&#039;t passed on to consumers. The decision referenced a Supreme Court case emphasizing that the tax component is typically included in the final product cost. Ultimately, the Court upheld the original judgment, dismissing the revision petitions.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 Jun 2024 08:10:35 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=78755</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>