{"id":316917,"date":"2024-03-14T09:00:55","date_gmt":"2024-03-14T03:30:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=316917"},"modified":"2024-03-21T12:35:38","modified_gmt":"2024-03-21T07:05:38","slug":"arbitrary-withholding-refund-claims-periods-despite-precedents-contrary-principles-fairness-equity-allahabad-hc-grant-relief-samsung","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/14\/arbitrary-withholding-refund-claims-periods-despite-precedents-contrary-principles-fairness-equity-allahabad-hc-grant-relief-samsung\/","title":{"rendered":"\u2018Arbitrary withholding of refund claims for specific periods, despite precedents, is contrary to principles of fairness and equity\u2019: Allahabad HC grants relief to Samsung"},"content":{"rendered":"<div style=\"text-align: justify; line-height: 150%;\">\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: bold;\">Allahabad High Court:<\/span> In a writ petition filed by Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Ltd. (&#8216;Samsung&#8217;) challenging the order passed by the Additional Commissioner, Shekhar B. Saraf, J. while setting aside the impugned orders, held the following:<\/p>\n<ul style=\"list-style-type: disc;\">\n<li>\n<p>While the principle of res judicata does not apply to taxation matters, it is incumbent upon authorities to take a consistent approach when dealing with similar factual and legal circumstances. The principle of consistency states that when faced with analogous factual and legal circumstances, the treatment should remain uniform. Taxpayers have a legitimate expectation that similar factual and legal circumstances will be met with uniform treatment, and any deviations from this principle undermine the credibility and legitimacy of the actions taken by tax authorities.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<p>When facts and circumstances in a subsequent assessment year are the same, no authority, whether quasi-judicial or judicial, can generally be allowed to take a contrary view. The arbitrary withholding of refund claims for specific periods, despite precedents and the absence of any material change in circumstances, is contrary to the principles of fairness and equity.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<p>Capital goods are intended for long-term use and are typically subject to capitalization. However, inputs are goods used in the day-to-day operations of the business and are not subject to capitalization.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">While issuing a show cause notice, it is incumbent upon the Department to clearly outline the specific allegations or concerns against the recipient. In no case, the Department can be allowed to traverse beyond the confines of the Show Cause Notice, since the same will trample upon the recipient&#8217;s right to defend itself. Any attempt by the issuing authority to expand the scope of inquiry or introduce new allegations beyond those articulated in the show cause notice would constitute a violation of the principles of natural justice.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"font-weight: bold;\">Background:<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">Samsung is engaged in the export of Information Technology design and software development services pertaining to mobile devices to its overseas holding company, namely, Samsung Electronics Company Limited, Korea (&#8216;SEC Korea&#8217;) in terms of prevalent service agreement. Such export of IT services is made by Samsung under Letter of Undertaking (&#8216;LOU&#8217;) without payment of IGST which constitutes zero rated supply as per Section <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0002534854\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">16<\/a> of the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0002928203\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017<\/a> (&#8216;IGST Act, 2017&#8217;).<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">For rendering IT Services to SEC Korea, Samsung procures various inputs, input services, and capital goods and accordingly avails Input tax credit (&#8216;ITC&#8217;) of the CGST, SGST, and IGST paid thereon, in accordance with the applicable provisions of the GST laws.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">Samsung filed a refund claim for unutilised ITC paid on various inputs and input services for the period of April 2019 to June 2019. After due consideration by the Department, said refund claim was sanctioned by the Department barring for an amount of Rs.7,500\/ on the ground of claiming refund of unutilised ITC on invoices missing in the GSTR-2A returns.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">Samsung then filed for the refund of the unutilised ITC paid on various inputs and input services, for the period of July &#8212; September 2019 and October &#8212; December 2019. Against the aforesaid refund applications, deficiency memos and later show cause notices were issued by the Department proposing to reject the refund for the aforesaid periods.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">Thereafter, Samsung filed a reply to the show cause notices and attended a personal hearing, after which the Department partially allowed the refund and rejected a portion of the demand on the ground that the specific goods are capital goods, and not input. Thereafter, Samsung filed appeals against the aforesaid orders, which were rejected. Aggrieved, Samsung preferred the writ petition before this Court and aggrieved by the order dated 24-02-2023, it preferred the writ tax before this Court.<\/p>\n<p style=\"font-weight: bold;\">Analysis:<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Court said that the refund claims arising from precisely similar facts and circumstances for previous and subsequent assessment periods were duly sanctioned. However, a stark deviation from this precedent is observed in the treatment of refund claims for the periods of July-September 2019 and October-December 2019, which have been inexplicably withheld by the Department. This sudden change in the Department&#8217;s stand is not only inconsistent but also irrational.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">Citing the principle of consistency, which dictates that when faced with identical factual and legal circumstances, the treatment should remain uniform, the court said that the Department&#8217;s decision to withhold refund claims for the afore-mentioned periods, despite having sanctioned similar claims in the past and subsequently in the future, lacks cogent rationale.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Court said that when taxpayers find themselves in analogous factual and legal circumstances, tax authorities must apply consistent treatment to avoid perceptions of unfairness. Inconsistencies in addressing comparable factual circumstances can lead to distrust in the fairness of the tax system and compromise compliance. Taxation departments must adhere to consistent interpretations and applications of tax laws and regulations. This adherence ensures that taxpayers are treated equitably under the law and prevents arbitrary decision-making by tax authorities.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Court said that the factual and legal circumstances surrounding the refund claims for July-September 2019 and October-December 2019 are indistinguishable from those of previous assessment periods and the subsequent assessment periods for which the refunds have been approved. The Department&#8217;s failure to provide a valid justification for this disparate treatment further underscores the inconsistency and irrationality of its actions. Moreover, such inconsistencies create uncertainty and confusion among taxpayers, leading to potential disputes and litigation. In the absence of clear and consistent guidelines, taxpayers may find it challenging to navigate the tax system, resulting in increased compliance costs and administrative burdens. It added that the taxpayers have a legitimate expectation that similar factual and legal circumstances will be met with uniform treatment, and any deviations from this principle undermine the credibility and legitimacy of the actions taken by tax authorities.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">After referring to various decisions of the Supreme Court, the Court said that the principle of consistency is sacrosanct in taxation matters. The Supreme Court has consistently emphasized that Revenue cannot take a different stand when facts are almost identical. The arbitrary withholding of refund claims for specific periods, despite past precedents and the absence of any material change in circumstances, is contrary to the principles of fairness and equity.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Court examined the distinction between &#8216;inputs&#8217; and &#8216;capital goods&#8217; and said that the specific goods used for R &amp; D and software development are essential for providing IT services, and therefore, qualify as inputs under the CGST Act, 2017.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Court also said that the issuance of a show cause notice entails the obligation on the authority to meticulously delineate specific allegations or concerns prompting its issuance. The principles of natural justice demand that the recipient be accorded a fair and impartial opportunity to respond to the allegations raised in the show cause notice.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Court said that, in the present case, the Department has deviated from the show cause notice, and as such any order passed by it running contrary to the grounds taken in the show cause notice, cannot be sustained, as adherence to the show cause notice is not merely a procedural formality but a mandatory requirement, beyond the scope of which, no action can be taken.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">[<span style=\"font-weight: bold; color: #632423;\">Samsung India Electronics Private Limited v. State of U.P., <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/EjZQGMB3\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">2024 SCC OnLine All 651<\/a>, decided on 12-03-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p style=\"font-style: italic;\">&#8220;Taxation serves as the cornerstone of governmental revenue, facilitating the provision of public services and infrastructure. Essential to this system is consistency, ensuring that similar factual and legal circumstances are met with uniform treatment.&#8221;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67512,"featured_media":314936,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[2822,44585,6241,26374,66355,66356,29554,45557,66357,66354,43829,5353,58553,2621,11091],"class_list":["post-316917","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-Allahabad_High_Court","tag-capital-goods","tag-gst","tag-input-tax-credit","tag-inputs","tag-it-services","tag-itc","tag-precedents","tag-principle-of-consistency","tag-principles-of-fairness-and-equity","tag-refund-claims","tag-res-judicata","tag-samsung","tag-Tax","tag-taxation"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v26.4 (Yoast SEO v26.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>\u2018Arbitrary withholding of refund claims for specific periods, despite precedents, is contrary to principles of fairness and equity\u2019: Allahabad HC grants relief to Samsung |SCC Blog<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Allahabad HC while granting relief to Samsung, held that arbitrary withholding of refund claims for specific periods, despite precedents, is contrary to principles of fairness and equity\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/14\/arbitrary-withholding-refund-claims-periods-despite-precedents-contrary-principles-fairness-equity-allahabad-hc-grant-relief-samsung\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"\u2018Arbitrary withholding of refund claims for specific periods, despite precedents, is contrary to principles of fairness and equity\u2019: Allahabad HC grants relief to Samsung\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Allahabad HC while granting relief to Samsung, held that arbitrary withholding of refund claims for specific periods, despite precedents, is contrary to principles of fairness and equity\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/14\/arbitrary-withholding-refund-claims-periods-despite-precedents-contrary-principles-fairness-equity-allahabad-hc-grant-relief-samsung\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2024-03-14T03:30:55+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2024-03-21T07:05:38+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Allahabad-High-Court.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"591\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Apoorva\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"\u2018Arbitrary withholding of refund claims for specific periods, despite precedents, is contrary to principles of fairness and equity\u2019: Allahabad HC grants relief to Samsung\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Apoorva\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/14\/arbitrary-withholding-refund-claims-periods-despite-precedents-contrary-principles-fairness-equity-allahabad-hc-grant-relief-samsung\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/14\/arbitrary-withholding-refund-claims-periods-despite-precedents-contrary-principles-fairness-equity-allahabad-hc-grant-relief-samsung\/\",\"name\":\"\u2018Arbitrary withholding of refund claims for specific periods, despite precedents, is contrary to principles of fairness and equity\u2019: Allahabad HC grants relief to Samsung |SCC Blog\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/14\/arbitrary-withholding-refund-claims-periods-despite-precedents-contrary-principles-fairness-equity-allahabad-hc-grant-relief-samsung\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/14\/arbitrary-withholding-refund-claims-periods-despite-precedents-contrary-principles-fairness-equity-allahabad-hc-grant-relief-samsung\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Allahabad-High-Court.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2024-03-14T03:30:55+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2024-03-21T07:05:38+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/288d814d0864b57168e08daa1940a1c9\"},\"description\":\"Allahabad HC while granting relief to Samsung, held that arbitrary withholding of refund claims for specific periods, despite precedents, is contrary to principles of fairness and equity\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/14\/arbitrary-withholding-refund-claims-periods-despite-precedents-contrary-principles-fairness-equity-allahabad-hc-grant-relief-samsung\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/14\/arbitrary-withholding-refund-claims-periods-despite-precedents-contrary-principles-fairness-equity-allahabad-hc-grant-relief-samsung\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/14\/arbitrary-withholding-refund-claims-periods-despite-precedents-contrary-principles-fairness-equity-allahabad-hc-grant-relief-samsung\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Allahabad-High-Court.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Allahabad-High-Court.webp\",\"width\":887,\"height\":591,\"caption\":\"Allahabad High Court\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/14\/arbitrary-withholding-refund-claims-periods-despite-precedents-contrary-principles-fairness-equity-allahabad-hc-grant-relief-samsung\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"\u2018Arbitrary withholding of refund claims for specific periods, despite precedents, is contrary to principles of fairness and equity\u2019: Allahabad HC grants relief to Samsung\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/288d814d0864b57168e08daa1940a1c9\",\"name\":\"Apoorva\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/549edb3ed2c7046a0c504583cf71db32c50251c1260a6331b2cc2973e80b0e91?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/549edb3ed2c7046a0c504583cf71db32c50251c1260a6331b2cc2973e80b0e91?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Apoorva\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc-editor\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"\u2018Arbitrary withholding of refund claims for specific periods, despite precedents, is contrary to principles of fairness and equity\u2019: Allahabad HC grants relief to Samsung |SCC Blog","description":"Allahabad HC while granting relief to Samsung, held that arbitrary withholding of refund claims for specific periods, despite precedents, is contrary to principles of fairness and equity","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/14\/arbitrary-withholding-refund-claims-periods-despite-precedents-contrary-principles-fairness-equity-allahabad-hc-grant-relief-samsung\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"\u2018Arbitrary withholding of refund claims for specific periods, despite precedents, is contrary to principles of fairness and equity\u2019: Allahabad HC grants relief to Samsung","og_description":"Allahabad HC while granting relief to Samsung, held that arbitrary withholding of refund claims for specific periods, despite precedents, is contrary to principles of fairness and equity","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/14\/arbitrary-withholding-refund-claims-periods-despite-precedents-contrary-principles-fairness-equity-allahabad-hc-grant-relief-samsung\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2024-03-14T03:30:55+00:00","article_modified_time":"2024-03-21T07:05:38+00:00","og_image":[{"width":887,"height":591,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Allahabad-High-Court.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Apoorva","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"\u2018Arbitrary withholding of refund claims for specific periods, despite precedents, is contrary to principles of fairness and equity\u2019: Allahabad HC grants relief to Samsung","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Apoorva","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/14\/arbitrary-withholding-refund-claims-periods-despite-precedents-contrary-principles-fairness-equity-allahabad-hc-grant-relief-samsung\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/14\/arbitrary-withholding-refund-claims-periods-despite-precedents-contrary-principles-fairness-equity-allahabad-hc-grant-relief-samsung\/","name":"\u2018Arbitrary withholding of refund claims for specific periods, despite precedents, is contrary to principles of fairness and equity\u2019: Allahabad HC grants relief to Samsung |SCC Blog","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/14\/arbitrary-withholding-refund-claims-periods-despite-precedents-contrary-principles-fairness-equity-allahabad-hc-grant-relief-samsung\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/14\/arbitrary-withholding-refund-claims-periods-despite-precedents-contrary-principles-fairness-equity-allahabad-hc-grant-relief-samsung\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Allahabad-High-Court.webp","datePublished":"2024-03-14T03:30:55+00:00","dateModified":"2024-03-21T07:05:38+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/288d814d0864b57168e08daa1940a1c9"},"description":"Allahabad HC while granting relief to Samsung, held that arbitrary withholding of refund claims for specific periods, despite precedents, is contrary to principles of fairness and equity","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/14\/arbitrary-withholding-refund-claims-periods-despite-precedents-contrary-principles-fairness-equity-allahabad-hc-grant-relief-samsung\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/14\/arbitrary-withholding-refund-claims-periods-despite-precedents-contrary-principles-fairness-equity-allahabad-hc-grant-relief-samsung\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/14\/arbitrary-withholding-refund-claims-periods-despite-precedents-contrary-principles-fairness-equity-allahabad-hc-grant-relief-samsung\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Allahabad-High-Court.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Allahabad-High-Court.webp","width":887,"height":591,"caption":"Allahabad High Court"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/14\/arbitrary-withholding-refund-claims-periods-despite-precedents-contrary-principles-fairness-equity-allahabad-hc-grant-relief-samsung\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"\u2018Arbitrary withholding of refund claims for specific periods, despite precedents, is contrary to principles of fairness and equity\u2019: Allahabad HC grants relief to Samsung"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/288d814d0864b57168e08daa1940a1c9","name":"Apoorva","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/549edb3ed2c7046a0c504583cf71db32c50251c1260a6331b2cc2973e80b0e91?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/549edb3ed2c7046a0c504583cf71db32c50251c1260a6331b2cc2973e80b0e91?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Apoorva"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc-editor\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Allahabad-High-Court.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":212750,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/30\/all-hc-order-dismissing-first-writ-petition-operates-as-res-judicata-second-petition-on-same-facts-not-allowed\/","url_meta":{"origin":316917,"position":0},"title":"All HC | Order dismissing first writ petition operates as res judicata; second petition on same facts not allowed","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"March 30, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Allahabad High Court: This writ petition was filed before a Divison Bench of Pankaj Kumar Jaiswal and Dr Yogendra Kumar Srivastava, JJ., for issuance of direction to respondent to consider the claim of petitioners for providing compensation in lieu of acquisition of plot situated in Village Pratap Patti District Varanasi\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":46911,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/05\/12\/previous-proceedings-would-operate-as-res-judicata-only-in-respect-of-issues-of-facts-and-not-on-issues-of-pure-questions-of-law\/","url_meta":{"origin":316917,"position":1},"title":"Previous proceedings would operate as res judicata only in respect of issues of facts and not on issues of pure questions of law","author":"Sucheta","date":"May 12, 2016","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: A bench of Dipak Misra and Shiva Kirti Singh, JJ, while relying upon Mathura Prasad Sarjoo Jaiswal v. Dossibai N.B. Jeejeebhoy, (1970) 1 SCC 613, held that the previous proceedings would operate as res judicata only in respect of issues of facts and not on issues of pure\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/DSC_5487.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/DSC_5487.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/DSC_5487.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/DSC_5487.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/DSC_5487.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/DSC_5487.jpg?resize=1400%2C800&ssl=1 4x"},"classes":[]},{"id":233863,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/08\/13\/all-hc-whether-principle-of-res-judicata-in-a-subsequent-claim-would-apply-on-an-issue-of-fact-which-in-the-former-proceedings-was-decided-by-a-forum-of-competent-jurisdiction-between-the-same-parti\/","url_meta":{"origin":316917,"position":2},"title":"All HC | Whether principle of res judicata in a subsequent claim would apply on an issue of fact which in the former proceedings was decided by a forum of competent jurisdiction between same parties; MACT award modified  \u00a0","author":"Editor","date":"August 13, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Allahabad High Court: Attau Rahman Masoodi, J., allowed the appeal and modified the impugned order by applying the principle of res judicata. The factual matrix of the case is such that the present appeal has arisen out of the judgment and award dated 16-02-2016 delivered by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":265202,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/04\/08\/advertisment-in-urdu-delhi-high-court\/","url_meta":{"origin":316917,"position":3},"title":"If an advertisement regarding scholarship was published in Urdu language, can it be presumed that it was targeted at students belonging to a particular community only? Del HC addresses","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"April 8, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court: The Division Bench of Manmohan and Dinesh Kumar Sharma, JJ., expressed that just because the scholarship advertisement was published in the Urdu language, does not mean that it was targeted at students belonging to a particular community only. Appellant\u2019s Counsel submitted that the Income Tax Tribunal while\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Delhi_New-logo.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Delhi_New-logo.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Delhi_New-logo.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Delhi_New-logo.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Delhi_New-logo.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":290829,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/04\/28\/explained-supreme-court-verdict-on-application-of-principle-of-res-judicata-and-other-cpc-provisions-legal-research-legal-news-updates\/","url_meta":{"origin":316917,"position":4},"title":"Explained| Supreme Court judgment on application of principle of Res Judicata and other CPC provisions","author":"Apoorva","date":"April 28, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The Supreme Court said that before examining the defendants\u2019 ground of res judicata to oppose the eviction petition, several aspects may have to be looked into, like whether such an issue was substantively at issue in the previous suit and similar such other questions may crop up.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"latest judgement of supreme court on res judicata","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/latest-judgement-of-supreme-court-on-res-judicata.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/latest-judgement-of-supreme-court-on-res-judicata.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/latest-judgement-of-supreme-court-on-res-judicata.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/latest-judgement-of-supreme-court-on-res-judicata.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":204131,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/24\/principles-for-applicability-res-judicata-among-co-defendants-re-iterated-sc\/","url_meta":{"origin":316917,"position":5},"title":"Principles for applicability \u201cres judicata among co-defendants\u201d re-iterated: SC","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"October 24, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: A Bench comprising of N.V. Ramana and M.M. Shantanagoudar, JJ., dismissed an appeal filed against the judgment of a Division Bench of Madras High Court whereby it allowed a letters patent appeal filed by the plaintiff in a partition suit. The plaintiff filed a suit in regard to\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/316917","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67512"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=316917"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/316917\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/314936"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=316917"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=316917"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=316917"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}