9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (1) TMI 276 - HC - GSTIGST on sale consideration - Warehousing of imported goods - double payment of IGST - Held that - Learned counsel for the respondents would obtain instructions on the said aspect and clarify the position in the counter affidavit - Re-list on 8th March, 2018.
Issues: Double payment of IGST, Clarification on tax calculation, Stay application
In the judgment delivered by the Delhi High Court, the court addressed the issue of potential double payment of IGST highlighted by the petitioner. The petitioner's counsel pointed out an example where IGST would be paid twice, once on the import value of goods and then again on the entire sale consideration. The court directed the respondents to clarify this matter in the counter affidavit and scheduled a re-listing on 8th March, 2018 for further consideration. The court indicated that if the petitioner's claim is substantiated, appropriate orders would be issued. Additionally, the court disposed of the application for stay with the mentioned observations. The judgment emphasized the importance of resolving the ambiguity regarding the calculation of IGST to prevent any unjust double taxation. The court instructed the respondents to provide clarification on the specific scenario presented by the petitioner to ensure a fair and accurate assessment of the tax liability. By setting a deadline for filing the counter affidavit and scheduling a re-listing, the court demonstrated its commitment to thoroughly examine the issue and make informed decisions based on the clarified position presented by the respondents. Furthermore, the court's decision to dispose of the stay application with the mentioned observations indicated its intention to proceed with the case while ensuring that any potential adverse effects on the petitioner are mitigated. This approach showcased the court's balanced consideration of the petitioner's concerns and the need for a comprehensive understanding of the tax implications involved. Overall, the judgment reflected a diligent and meticulous approach by the court in addressing the complexities of tax calculation and ensuring a just resolution for all parties involved.
|
