By not making refund within time limit prescribed by law i.e. ...

Refund Officer's Delay Breaches Law; Petitioner Wrongly Labeled Defaulter u/s 30(2), Causing Undue Hardship.

December 24, 2015

Case Laws VAT and Sales Tax HC

By not making refund within time limit prescribed by law i.e. within three months, the Refund Officer has violated law and, therefore, when the department itself made the direct credit as late as on 28.03.2013, the present officer has treated him as defaulter within the meaning of section 30 (2) forgetting that the Refund Officer had himself violated the law. Thus, the Refund Officer as well the concerned Assistant Commissioner both have put the petitioner to a double whammy. - HC

View Source

← Previous Next →

By not making refund within time limit prescribed by law i.e. ...

Refund Officer's Delay Breaches Law; Petitioner Wrongly Labeled Defaulter u/s 30(2), Causing Undue Hardship.

December 24, 2015

Case Laws VAT and Sales Tax HC

You may also like:

Interest on delayed refund - relevant time for calculation of interest - Considering Section 30 of the Act, which stipulates interest on delayed refunds, the court...

The AAAR dismissed the appeal due to late filing beyond the statutorily prescribed time limits under Section 100(2) of CGST Act, 2017. The Authority clarified that while...

Refund of IGST on goods exported - The High court found the denial of the IGST refund, based on the administrative discrepancies between the ICEGATE and GST Common...

Inordinate delay in adjudication of show cause notice by revenue authorities constitutes breach of fair procedure and violates principles of natural justice, causing...

Registration u/s 12A - Rejection of petitioner's application u/s 119(2)(b) for delay in filing audit report in Form-10B. Held that petitioners are entitled to succeed....

Seeking Condonation of Delay of 14 days in filing of the Appeal - It is really strange that the agency of the Government failed to seek the required information within...

Penalty u/s. 272A(2)(k) - Assessee had not offered any reasonable cause for delay in filing of TDS statements u/s. 200(3) - The default committed by the assessee is only...

The HC condoned the delay of 799 days by the petitioner in filing Form 9A u/s 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act. Despite the delay being bona fide, the Assessing Officer...

Validity of SCN - Jurisdiction - Proper Officer or not - whether by virtue of the notifications dated 07.07.1997, 07.03.2002 and 06.07.2011, the DRI would have the...

Refund of sales tax - The right to seek the refund having been crystalised on September 30, 2011 and in any case as the order rejecting refund is passed on September 20,...

Delay in issuing Refund under Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2020 - interest on delayed refund - Despite the issuance of Form No. 5, the refunds for the Assessment...

Condonation of delay - delay of almost 2 years - the order in Original was passed on 30.11.2012. Even as on today, no steps were taken by the department in collecting...

Section 142(1) notice issued by non-jurisdictional officer held valid. Plain reading of Section 143(2) indicates either Assessing Officer or prescribed income-tax...

Seeking to Condone Delay of 14 days in filing the Appeal - Sufficient cause for delay or not - Even if the Appellant's argument regarding the delay in accessing the...

Application for condonation of delay u/s 119(2)(b) - condonation of delay in filing returns and claiming refund - Section 119(2)(b) does not impose any limitation for...

Quick Updates: