In this regard, the petitioner was guided by Central Board of Direct Taxes (“ CBDT” for short) Circular No. 7 of 2018, dated 20 December 2018 for the A.Y. 2016-2017 issued under Section 119(2)(b) of the IT Act.
Bombay High Court sets aside refund rejection due to lack of hearing, citing Rule 92(3) of CGST Rules and principles of natural justice. Case remanded for review.
Held that in our view, two authorities have examined the facts and have given a finding of fact that the same Cenvat Credit was wrongly availed and passed on to the customer, and this has not been rebutted.
Bombay High Court addresses potential contempt of court in the arrest of Mishal J Shah by state tax officials. Key developments and next steps detailed.
Bombay HC ruled GST authorities can’t be blamed for no GST RFD 03 if SCN issued but restored the refund application, imposing ₹2L cost for non-compliance.
Bombay HC examines Section 87A rebate issues due to ITR software changes post-July 2024, affecting taxpayers’ rights. Interim relief granted; final hearing on Jan 2025.
Bombay High Court upheld the petitioner’s claim that the director’s statement quantifies tax dues, making them eligible for the SVLDRS scheme.
Bombay HC clarifies ‘already pending or decided’ under CGST Act. Respondent directed to resolve advance ruling application within 3 months.
“Bombay High Court quashes FIR against Pidilite manager citing double jeopardy. Incident involved factory fire causing injuries. Read key legal arguments and judgment.”
Bombay High Court ruled in favor of employee’s deemed voluntary retirement after the bank’s failure to communicate rejection within three months.
