https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755642 Refund arising from the 2011-12 assessment could not be adjusted against the 2010-11 demand once the petitioner had already complied with the settlement scheme and no outstanding liability remained. The court held that the adjustment was without authority of law and contrary to the settlement scheme and refund procedure under the MVAT Rules. The bar on refund under the settlement scheme applied only to the amount paid under that scheme, not to a separate refund already crystallised under the appellate order for 2011-12. Retention of the excess amount would also violate Article 265 of the Constitution. The petitioner was entitled to refund with interest. en-us Tue, 09 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 16 Jul 2024 21:12:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755642 Refund arising from the 2011-12 assessment could not be adjusted against the 2010-11 demand once the petitioner had already complied with the settlement scheme and no outstanding liability remained. The court held that the adjustment was without authority of law and contrary to the settlement scheme and refund procedure under the MVAT Rules. The bar on refund under the settlement scheme applied only to the amount paid under that scheme, not to a separate refund already crystallised under the appellate order for 2011-12. Retention of the excess amount would also violate Article 265 of the Constitution. The petitioner was entitled to refund with interest. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 09 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755642