Back
SHEEL NAGU
Prism Johnson Limited – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
ORDER
1. Both the writ petitions, namely, W.P. No.9226 of 2020 and W.P. No.9231 of 2020 involve common question of facts as well as law and, therefore, are being decided by this common order.
2. These petitions assail not only the show cause notices issued but also the consequential orders passed by the competent authority refusing claim for refund of accumulated credit of compensation cess.
3. The principal grounds of challenge to the aforesaid show cause notices and subsequent orders are that the refund despite being due to the petitioner in law has been wrongly denied and the consequential orders of refusal to refund are non-speaking.
4. Learned counsel for Revenue has filed a counter-reply refuting submissions of petitioner by primarily submitting that the impugned consequential orders declining refund contain sufficient reasons to save them from being sacrificed at the alter of natural justice. On merits, the respondents in their counter-reply also submits that the claim for refund made by the petitioner was time barred on the anvil of Section 54 (14) (2) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. It is also submitted by the Revenue that in terms of Section 16(4) of CGST Act
When the competent administrative authority for filing tax refunds remains ambiguous, the limitation period commences only from the date of official clarification, subsequently adjusted by judicial e....
The exclusion of the period from 15.03.2020 till 14.03.2021 in computing the period of limitation for any suit, appeal, application or proceeding, as directed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, influenced....
Refund applications for exported goods are not subject to proof of payment within 180 days, as mandated by current legislation and circulars.
The rejection of a refund claim without affording the claimant an opportunity of being heard violates the principles of natural justice and the provisions of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 20....
The court established that the extension of the limitation period for GST refund applications due to COVID-19 applies retroactively to claims made during that period.
The court established that tax authorities must provide clear reasons for rejecting refund claims to comply with natural justice principles.
The exclusion period provided in the notification issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs allowed for the period affected by the COVID-19 pandemic to be excluded for the purposes of....
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
