Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO, SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N, JJ
Sembcorp Energy India Limited – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
ORDER :
R. Raghunandan Rao, J.
This batch of cases has been filed by the same petitioner. These cases raise a common question of law. In the circumstances, all these are being disposed of by way of this common order.
2. Heard Sri Raghavan Ramabadran, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner through virtual mode assisted by Ms. Maheswari Arika, learned counsel and Sri Y.N. Vivekananda, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents assisted by Sri Ravula Nagarjuna, learned Junior Standing Counsel.
3. The petitioner is involved in the business of power generation and sources coal and other goods from India and abroad. Whenever the petitioner sources coal from abroad, the transport of the coal and other goods, from outside India is done on C.I.F. basis or on F.O.B. basis. The petitioner, upon import of the said coal or other goods, pays tax under the I.G.S.T. Act on the value of the goods imported into India. Apart from this, the petitioner had also paid tax under I.G.S.T. Act, on a reverse charge mechanism basis, on the cost of freight in F.O.B. contracts. The petitioner, after such payments, had sought refund of the tax paid under the I.G.S.T. Act, on the freight char
Double taxation on the same transaction is impermissible, as established in the context of both C.I.F. and F.O.B. contracts.
The court affirmed that an unlawful tax collection obligates the government to refund with interest, reinforcing the principle of unjust enrichment and constitutional mandates under Article 265.
Refund of IGST is mandated when earlier notifications were found unconstitutional, confirming unavailability of time-bar arguments.
Interest is payable on a tax refund when the tax was collected unlawfully, dating from payment until refund, emphasizing equity and restitution principles.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the separately charged freight in the sale bill is not part of the sale price and is therefore excluded while calculating the taxable turnover....
The court ruled that interest and penalties under the Customs Tariff Act were not applicable prior to the amendment of Section 3(12), which is prospective in nature.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
