Page 23 - GSTL_23rd July 2020_Vol 38_Part 4

2020 ] INDEX - 23rd July, 2020 xxi
Ordnance Factory is covered under definition of Central Government under
GST law - See under CENTRAL GOVERNMENT ................ 530
Precedent - Decision of Goodswear Fashion Pvt. Ltd. [2019 (23) G.S.T.L. 154
(A.A.R. - GST)] not taken into account the relevant circulars of C.B.E. &
C. relating to classification of fusible interlining cloth and hence cannot
be said to reflect the true legal position on this issue — In Re : Sadguru Seva
Paridhan Pvt. Ltd. (App. A.A.R. - GST - W.B.) ....................... 499
Provisional attachment - Writ petition directed to be treated as objection
filed by assessee and be decided by competent authority - See under
WRIT JURISDICTION ............................... 455
Pure services of Manpower supply or Security services provided to
Government, exemption from GST admissible - See under MANPOWER
SUPPLY, SECURITY SERVICES .......................... 484
Rate of GST on Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) sold in Bottle to
Commercial/Domestic Customers - See under GAS .............. 467
Rate of interest enhanced on delayed refund despite Court order - See under
INTEREST ...................................... 457
Recovery of money from Municipality, writ jurisdiction maintainable - See
under WRIT JURISDICTION ........................... 438
Rectification of mistake - Advance Ruling - Additional submissions made
by appellant inconsequential and not bear any significant bearing on the
outcome of the case - No error apparent on the face of record - Section
102 of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 — In Re : H.P. Sales India Pvt.
Ltd. (App. - A.A.R. - GST - Mah.) ............................. 505
REFUND/REFUND CLAIM :
— Amount deposited under protest - Petitioner seeking refund of amount by
calling it “pre-deposit”, when amount not deposited by way of pre-
deposit but under protest, even before any demand was raised and while
petitioner was still being investigated against - Such deposits under
protest, to ease rigors which Tax Authorities otherwise are entitled to
impose, are not unknown and judicial notice has been taken thereof -
However as long as amount deposited is under protest and in which
protest, no grounds required to be stated, no right thereto accrues in
favour of depositee till depositee held entitled in law thereto - Wrong
nomenclature given by petitioner to deposit not to be ground for
allowing State to unduly enrich themselves - Article 265 of Constitution
of India — Team HR Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India (Del.) .............. 457
— delayed despite Court order, rate of interest for delayed refund increased
by Court - See under INTEREST ......................... 457
— of deposit made pending investigation - Demand for entire sum of
` 4,66,39,061 set aside by CESTAT on the ground of being barred by time
- Petitioner aggrieved by appropriation of amount of ` 2,38,00,000
already deposited when demand with respect whereto also set aside -
HELD : Demand cannot be bifurcated as Commissioner as well as
CESTAT dealt with entire demand as one and set aside same - Deposit
made under protest and against anticipated liability - No assessment
made and no demand raised at time of deposit of said amount - Allowing
State to retain said amount, also to be in violation of Section 72 of
Contract Act, 1872, as said provision enshrines principle of unjust
GST LAW TIMES  23rd July 2020  23