#refund

The Patna HC held that post-registration, authorities lack jurisdiction to levy deficit stamp duty under Section 47-A(1) of the Indian Stamp Act and quashed the orders demanding it. It directed refund of any pre-deposited amounts within eight weeks, affecting buyers, sellers and revenue officials in Bihar.

Delhi State CDRC held that Omaxe’s allotment change and delayed possession amounted to deficient service, ordering refund of ₹5,52,838 with interest and ₹4 lakh compensation for mental agony, reinforcing buyers’ rights against builder delays.

A SEZ unit’s claim for service tax refund was allowed despite filing beyond the six-month limit, because the SEZ Act’s substantive exemption prevails over procedural time bars. This clarifies that revenue authorities cannot reject refunds solely on limitation grounds for SEZ entities. The ruling benefits all SEZ manufacturers seeking tax refunds for pre-2011 periods.

The commission ordered the hotel to refund the consumer’s Rs 16.12 lakh advance, plus interest, compensation and costs, because the promised postponement could not override the contract’s cancellation clause. This ruling reinforces that any advance must be returned when the agreed service is not performed, safeguarding consumers in hotel and event bookings.