^®
TaxReply India Private Limited

GST Library

Best GST Library

Subscription Plans

TaxGPT

GST News | Updates

GST Calendar

GST Case Laws

GST Case Laws Sitemap

GST Notifications, Circulars, Releases etc.

Act & Rules

Act & Rules (Multi-view)

GST Rates

HSN Codes ^New

GST Forms

GST Diary

GST Notebook

GST Fees Manager

GST Council Meetings

GST Set-off Calculator

ITC Reversal Calculator

E-invoice Calculator

Inverted Duty Calculator

GSTR-3B Manual

GSTR-9 Manual

GSTR-9C Manual

Full Site Search

E-way Bill

Finance Bill

GST e-books

TaxReply Support

YouTube Videos

Twitter

Buy Premium Tax Domains

About Us

Our Services

🔒

TaxReply India Pvt Ltd

🔒

^®

Subscribe Free GST updates on...

Subscribe to Best GST Library of India and get ahead of the rest. Click here for plans. | GST Act & Rules e-book Click here. |

GENPACT INDIA PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
(Punjab and Haryana High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH
ASHOK KUMAR VERMA

Pet. Counsel

Tarun Gulati

Nikhil Gupta

Abhishek Boob

Res. Counsel

Sunish Bindlish

Petitioner / Applicant	GENPACT INDIA PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS
Respondent	UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
Court	Punjab and Haryana High Court
State	Punjab
Date	Jan 29, 2021
Order No.	CWP-10302-2020, CWP-18876-2020, CWP-16305-2020
Citation	2021(1) TAXREPLY 3897
Add to Favorites	Add to favorites.
Download Original Order
Print (Full Page)
Print (Judgement Only)

TaxGPT ^Beta

Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

AA |

ORDER
By this order, we propose to dispose of three writ petitions i.e. CWP Nos. 10302, 18876 and 16305-2020. In CWP Nos. 10302 and 16305-2020, challenge is to the orders dated 27.05.2020 and 05.08.2020 (Annexures P-9 and Annexure P-1, respectively) passed by the Appellate Authority, whereby the refund claimed by the petitioners has been rejected. In CWP-18876-2020, the petitioner has straightway approached this Court, challenging the order dated 11.09.2020 (Annexure P-1) of the Adjudicating Authority, vide which the refund claimed by the petitioner has been rejected. Having heard the counsel for the parties and on going through the pleadings as well as the impugned orders, we are of the firm view that the above orders impugned passed by the Adjudicating Authority/Appellate Authority, are cryptic and non-speaking and the reasons assigned for holding the petitioners to be intermediaries, do not sustain as they do not pass the test of law as has been laid down in the judgments. ....