TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether refund could be denied on the ground of unjust enrichment when the activity was held not taxable and no service tax was collected from the subscribers.
Analysis: Once the activity was not taxable, there could be no liability to tax. The Revenue did not undertake verification from any subscriber or from available records to establish that the incidence of tax had been passed on, and therefore a presumption of unjust enrichment was not justified.
Conclusion: The denial of refund was unsustainable and the appeal was allowed in favour of the assessee.
Ratio Decidendi: Where no tax was collected and the Revenue fails to establish passing on of incidence, refund cannot be denied on the ground of unjust enrichment.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
