GSTAT Raipur
For revenue
Case-law directory
Every ruling, in plain sight.
Search and filter tax rulings from the Supreme Court, the High Courts, the GST Appellate Tribunal and the advance-ruling authorities.
Case-law directory
Search and filter tax rulings from the Supreme Court, the High Courts, the GST Appellate Tribunal and the advance-ruling authorities.
4 rulings found
GSTAT Raipur
Where manufacturer claimed refund of unutilised ITC due to inverted duty structure and was sanctioned amount exceeding entitlement under Section 54 read with Rule 89(5), such payment qualified as refund and, if in excess, constituted an 'erroneous refund' recoverable under Section 73, without exclusion based on ITC origin, as confirmed by subsequent rule and circular. GST: Where assessee received refund on inverted-duty structure via RFD-06 order and department did not appeal or seek revision, initiation of recovery proceedings for erroneous refund under Section 73 was permissible as Section 73 operates independently with its own notice and limitation, and non-invocation of appeal or revision mechanisms does not bar such recovery action. GST: Where appellant received erroneous refund of Rs. 90.35 lakhs on inverted-duty structure and paid back principal amount during recovery proceedings without paying interest, interest under Section 50 at 18 percent per annum for delayed period was legally leviable as interest is compensatory, and mere payment of principal did not conclude liability or proceedings under Section 73
GSTAT Hyderabad
Where first appellate authority, by relying on equitable powers arising from Article 226 as well as from orders of High Courts, condoned delay in filing appeals against registration cancellation beyond statutorily permissible limit, such condonation was ultra vires as first appellate authority could not invoke constitutional relief. GST: Where Department restored registrations after respondents discharged tax dues and acted upon impugned appellate orders by permitting return filings and business resumption, subsequent appeals filed by Department against condonation were infructuous as operative relief was already effected; Department could not unsettle crystallised legal positions. GST: Where registration was cancelled for non-filing returns and portal barred delayed requests for revocation, respondents could validly pursue statutory appeal under Section 107, since inability to invoke Rule 23 revocation due to procedural restrictions did not extinguish right to challenge cancellation by way of appeal
GSTAT Hyderabad
Where taxpayers filed appeals against suo motu cancellation of registration after expiry of both normal and outer condonable period, appellate authority relied on High Court Article 226 orders to condone delay, since statutory authority is bound by statute and cannot translocate extraordinary constitutional powers, condonation beyond statutory limit was ultra vires and orders were liable to be set aside GST: Where respondents complied with revocation orders and their registrations were restored, allowing them to resume returns filing, Department’s appeals against condonation became academic since legal position had changed and restoration was implemented, hence annulment would disturb settled rights and input tax credits, making appeals futile and not maintainable as matter had become infructuous
GSTAT Hyderabad
Where respondents' registrations were cancelled due to non-filing, and no timely revocation was sought, with appeals filed after expiry of both appeal period and condonable delay under Section 107, First Appellate Authority could not condone such delay beyond statutory limit, as equity and reliance on High Court orders cannot expand statutory appellate jurisdiction, making condonation ultra vires GST: Where department implemented impugned FAA orders by restoring GST registrations, and allowing respondents to file pending returns, any subsequent departmental appeal became infructuous as effective relief would disturb respondents’ restored status and commercial position, hence such appeals challenging condonation were deemed academic and not maintainable