1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>Appellate tribunal allows refund claim for CENVAT credit despite name change</h1> The appellate tribunal in CESTAT Bangalore allowed the appellant's appeal for a refund claim of CENVAT credit under Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. ... Denial of refund claim - Accumulated CENVAT Credit - FIRCs received for the exports made are not in the name of the appellant - Held that:- unable to find out legal provisions which provides that in case of change in the name, refund claim is not admissible. In the case of recovery of short-levy, short collection of revenue, show-cause notices are issued and amount is collected in similar cases. In such a situation, when it comes to refund, rejection of the claim only on the ground without support of any legal provision cannot be sustained - Decided in favour of assessee. The appellate tribunal in CESTAT Bangalore allowed the appeal of the appellant regarding a refund claim for CENVAT credit accumulated under Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. The rejection of the claim based on FIRCs not being in the appellant's current name was deemed incorrect as the company's name change did not affect the validity of the claim. The appeal was allowed with consequential relief to the appellant.