The ruling in brief
Where manufacturer of edible oils re-filed differential ITC refund claims for same periods after remand due to changes in refund formula and satisfied substantive and procedural requirements under Section 54 and Rule 89, technically rejected supplementary claims were maintainable if within limitation, and technical objections could not override substantive entitlement, thus, appellate authority's grant of refund required no interference
Provisions considered
Section 54 of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017/Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - Rule 89 of Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017/Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017
This summary is for general information and is not legal advice. Read the full decision and the applicable law before relying on it.