Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
VIPIN SANGHI, SANJEEV NARULA
TMA International Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. relevant background of petitioners and gst implementation (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. process of claiming igst refund and duty drawback clarification (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. legal basis and counterarguments regarding igst refund (Para 7 , 8) |
| 4. judicial precedents supporting petitioners' claims (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 5. court's reasoning on taxpayers' rights amid gst confusion (Para 14 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 6. court orders verification process for resolution (Para 20 , 21 , 22) |
ORDER
Sanjeev Narula, J. (Oral)--The present petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeks the following reliefs:
"(a) Declare that Paragraph 11(d) read with 12A(a)(ii) of the Notes and Conditions of the Notification No. 131/2016-Cus. (N.T.), dated 31-10-2016 [as amended by Notification No. 59/2017-Cus. (N.T.), dated 29-6-2017 and Notification No. 73/2017-Cus. (N.T.), dated 26-7-2017] are ultra vires Section 16 of the IGST Act, 2017 read with Section 54 of CGST Act, 2017 and Rule 96 of CGST Rules, 2017; and are unconstitutional and violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India & Quash the same;
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
