Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.83 seconds)
Documents citing Britannia Industries Limited vs Union Of India on 7 August, 2023

M/S.Wipro Ltd vs The Assistant Commissioner on 13 December, 2024

In reply, the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submitted that in the case of Britannia Industries Ltd. Vs. Union of India reported in 2020 (42) G.S.T.L.3 (Guj.), the Division Bench of Gujarat High Court had rendered a decision in favour of SEZ Unit. However, as against the said decision, the Department had preferred a Special Leave Petition in SLP Diary No.19737 of 2021 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Later, the said SLP was renumbered as Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.13431 of 2021. On 29.07.2024, the Hon'ble Supreme Court disposed of the said petition as not pressed since the tax effect of the subject matter of said petition was falling below the threshold contained in Circular dated 22.08.2019 of the Central Board of Indirect Tax & Customs.
Madras High Court Cites 40 - Cited by 0 - C Saravanan - Full Document

M/S. Ajanta Pharma Limited vs Union Of India on 16 October, 2025

Relying on the decision in the case of M/s.Britannia Industries Ltd (supra), learned advocate Mr. Anandodaya Mishra Page 7 of 18 Uploaded by BIMAL B CHAKRAVARTY(HC01089) on Thu Oct 16 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 17 03:26:30 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/6833/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/10/2025 undefined for the petitioner submitted that the ratio as laid down in the decision is squarely applicable in the facts of the present case.
Gujarat High Court Cites 16 - Cited by 0 - B D Karia - Full Document

Union Of India vs Messrs Meghmani Organochem Limited on 22 September, 2025

2. Mr. Chandrashekhara Bharathi, the learned counsel appearing for the revenue submitted that Britannia Industries Limited (supra) was challenged before this Court, however, the challenge failed on the ground of low tax effect. He would submit that it is only the supplier who could have preferred the application claiming a refund of the unutilised ITC accumulated under Rule 89 of the CGST Rules and not the SEZ Unit.
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1