Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN, J, M.S. Ramachandra Rao, CJ.
Bla Infrastructure Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Deepak Roshan, J.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioner praying therein for the following reliefs:
a. For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, directing upon the Respondents to show cause as to why the refund application of the Petitioner has not been processed which pertains to refund of the pre- deposited amount with the government exchequer in order to maintain the appeal under Section 107 of the Act.
b. Consequent upon showing cause, if any, and on being satisfied that the Respondents were obligated to grant refund of the pre-deposit amount and the refund application of the Petitioner could not have been automatically rejected on the ground of being time barred, the Respondents be directed to refund the amount of pre-deposit forthwith along with statutory interest.
c. For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, holding and declaring that once the appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed, withholding of the pre- deposit amount without any reasonable cause would be hit by Article 265 of the Constitution of India, which mandates that no tax shall be levied or collected except
The time limit for refund applications under Section 54 of the GST Act is directory, allowing claims beyond two years if justified, in line with Article 265 of the Constitution.
Voluntary payments made under a mistake are not subject to the limitation period for refund claims under Section 54(1) of the GST Act.
The court ruled that the denial of a tax refund on grounds of limitation was wrong, emphasizing the principle of unjust enrichment, and clarified that the time limit of two years for refund applicati....
The requirement of a formal application for refund under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, is a statutory mandate, and interest on a delayed refund is payable from the date of receipt of s....
Appellant entitled to interest on delayed refund as per Sections 11B and 11BB of the Central Excise Act, which specifically governs the timing and rate of interest applicable.
Refund claims for amounts paid under mistaken law must be honored, particularly when tax liability is later recognized as non-existent, overriding strict procedural limitations.
The court established that the limitation period for refund applications under the CGST Act is determined by the original filing date, not subsequent deficiencies.
The provisions of Section 54(c) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, are unconstitutional as they impose an arbitrary limitation on refunds for unused stamp papers, violating Article 14 of the Constitution....
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
