<?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>2025 (7) TMI 143 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774075</link>
    <description>Under the Assam Value Added Tax Act and the Central Sales Tax Act, a reimbursement claim for local tax on declared goods could not be treated as rejected merely because the original assessment orders were silent on it. The Court stated that, in the absence of any statutory review power, the Commissioner could not reopen or undo a conscious earlier recommendation for reimbursement, and any challenge to an allegedly invalid re-assessment had to be pursued by appeal under the Act. It further held that a claim for reimbursement of VAT on raw petroleum coke, after inter-State sale of calcined petroleum coke with CST paid, was not barred by delay, laches or acquiescence where there had been no express rejection of the claim.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 27 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 03 Jul 2025 08:34:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=833408" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (7) TMI 143 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774075</link>
      <description>Under the Assam Value Added Tax Act and the Central Sales Tax Act, a reimbursement claim for local tax on declared goods could not be treated as rejected merely because the original assessment orders were silent on it. The Court stated that, in the absence of any statutory review power, the Commissioner could not reopen or undo a conscious earlier recommendation for reimbursement, and any challenge to an allegedly invalid re-assessment had to be pursued by appeal under the Act. It further held that a claim for reimbursement of VAT on raw petroleum coke, after inter-State sale of calcined petroleum coke with CST paid, was not barred by delay, laches or acquiescence where there had been no express rejection of the claim.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT / Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774075</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>