HC determined petitioner entitled to refund of Rs.33,69,271 paid ...

Taxpayer Wins Rs.33.69 Lakh GST Refund Case Under Section 128A After Department Confirms PLA Account Credit Adjustment

January 31, 2025

Case Laws GST HC

HC determined petitioner entitled to refund of Rs.33,69,271 paid under CGST Act following Section 128A implementation. Department confirmed adjustment of amount through PLA account credit against returns filed on 31.10.2017. Court granted liberty to petitioner to file refund application for deposited amount. Department acknowledged compliance with previous court queries from 17.12.2024 order, particularly paragraphs 5 and 6. Writ petition concluded with directive for processing refund as per statutory provisions under CGST framework.

View Source

← Previous Next →

HC determined petitioner entitled to refund of Rs.33,69,271 paid ...

Taxpayer Wins Rs.33.69 Lakh GST Refund Case Under Section 128A After Department Confirms PLA Account Credit Adjustment

January 31, 2025

Case Laws GST HC

You may also like:

Addition of fixed deposits and interest thereon in wife's name was deleted as the Revenue could not controvert that the deposits belonged to the assessee's wife from her...

Petitioner paid Rs. 8,46,84,821/- under Settlement Scheme for 2010-2011, against which Respondents recovered Rs. 19,16,74,501/-, resulting in excess collection of Rs....

Refund claim of amount deposited during investigation - the appellant is entitled to refund with interest under Section 35 FF, for which no limitation is applicable. The...

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal against the reopening of assessment u/s 148A of the Income Tax Act. The Assessing Officer had alleged...

Contravention of Sections 8(1) and 9(1)(f)(i) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 - receiving foreign exchange payments in 1996-97 through fake export documents...

The Indian Finance Minister's upcoming FY2025-26 Budget presentation focuses on critical fiscal metrics and consolidation targets. The government aims to reduce fiscal...

Expenditure on remuneration of employees (i.e., four servants and two drivers) - confirmed the addition at Rs.1.50 lakhs as against at Rs.4.68 lakhs by the CIT(A) - AT

Appellant imported fermented and dried processed Sumatra cocoa beans which failed to conform to IS 8865:2003 standards as per FSSAI and BIS testing. Adjudicating...

Unexplained investment u/s 69 - wire transfer from NRE account - assessee is a non-resident - transfer from the account of the assessee’s son, who is also a resident of...

Withholding of refund of GST - Sec.33-E and 33-F of the APGST Act give 6 months time to the respondents to complete the verification and the authorities cannot with hold...

Demand on account of alleged delay in availing Input Tax Credit purportedly Rs. 23,35,892/- out of Rs. 57,12,114/-. Impugned order set aside to that extent, case...

Refund claim u/s 142(3) of CGST Act, 2017 read with Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1994 was partially allowed. Refund of Rs. 20,52,143/- and Rs. 2,19,004/- granted,...

The ITAT accepted the assessee's explanation regarding the WhatsApp chat and held that the provisions of section 69A cannot be invoked for the addition of Rs. 30 lakhs,...

Refund of amount deposited as pre-deposit - It stands clear that appellant is entitled for refund of ₹ 15 Lakhs as were paid in cash by him at the time of the...

The ITAT held that the assessee failed to explain the nature and source of investment with necessary supporting evidence. The PCIT's action invoking section 263 was in...

Quick Updates: