M/S. Adp Private Limited, vs The Additional Commissioner Appealsi, on 25 August, 2025

0
10

Sri Narendra Dave, learned counsel appears for

M/s. Lakshmi Kumaran & Sridharan, learned counsel for

petitioner.

Smt. B. Sapna Reddy, learned Senior Counsel for

Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs appears for

respondent Nos.1 to 3.

2. These two Writ Petitions assail the order-in-appeal

passed by the Additional Commissioner (Appeals-I),

Hyderabad, respondent No.1, in respect of July, 2020, to

September, 2020, and October, 2020, to December, 2020,

wherein the appellate authority vide common order dated

29.09.2023 has set aside the refund sanction orders dated

02.09.2022 and 07.10.2022 passed by the Deputy

Commissioner of Central Tax, Hyderabad, inter alia holding

that the Refund Sanctioning Authority erred in classifying the

service as export of service without examining nature of
2 HCJ (AKrS, J) & GMM, J
W.P.Nos.26406 and 26419 of 2024

service, place of provision of service and the applicability of

sub-section (3) to (13) of Section 13 of Integrated Goods &

Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short ‘IGST Act, 2017’), on the

question whether the supply qualifies as export and whether

the refund is permissible.

[ad_1]

Source link

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here