Just a moment...

Top
Help
🎉 Festive Offer: Flat 15% off on all plans! →⚡ Don’t Miss Out: Limited-Time Offer →
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Appellate Tribunal CESTAT ruling upholds denial of service tax refund, stresses compliance & active participation</h1> <h3>M/s. Shree Adinath Bulk Carriers Versus Commissioner of Service Tax, Ahmedabad</h3> The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Ahmedabad centered on the eligibility of the appellant for a refund of service tax paid up to 19.01.2012. ... Denial of refund claim - Whether appellant is eligible to the refund of service tax paid up to the period 19.01.2012 - Held that:- Appellant claimed that his business was transferred to one Shri Narendra Jain (Prop.) in October 2010 but by mistake appellant paid service tax of ₹ 24,59,006/- for the period 03.2.2011 to 02.4.2011. New Service provider Shri Narendra Jain (Prop.) obtaining registration on 19.1.2012 - New registration was obtained by Shri Narendra Jain only with effect from 19.1.2012. Before this appellant was the registered unit and correctly paid the service tax and also filed required ST-3 returns for the relevant period. In view of the factual matrix the order passed by the first appellate authority, in rejecting the appeal of the appellant, is correct. - Decided in favour of Revenue. Issues Involved:1. Eligibility of the appellant for a refund of service tax paid up to 19.01.2012.Analysis:The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Ahmedabad revolved around the issue of whether the appellant was entitled to a refund of service tax paid up to 19.01.2012. The appellant claimed that the service tax amount was mistakenly deposited in the name of a different entity, Shree Adinath Bulk Carriers, instead of the correct entity, Shri Narendra Jain. However, the first appellate authority found that at the time of deposit, only one registration existed in the name of the appellant, and Shri Narendra Jain obtained a new registration on 19.01.2012. The authority concluded that the plea of the appellant regarding the mistaken deposit was without merit. The appellant argued that the business was transferred to Shri Narendra Jain in October 2010, but the service tax was paid for a period after this transfer. The Tribunal upheld the decision of the first appellate authority, stating that the appellant was the registered unit before Shri Narendra Jain obtained a new registration and correctly paid the service tax during the relevant period. Consequently, the appeal was rejected on both merit and non-prosecution grounds.In the absence of the appellant during the hearing, a request for adjournment was made by the appellant's Chartered Accountant due to a social engagement. However, the Tribunal rejected the adjournment request as the reason provided was not deemed convincing. The Revenue was represented by Shri Gobind Jha, who defended the orders passed by the lower authorities. The Tribunal heard the arguments presented by the learned AR and examined the case records before delivering its decision. The Tribunal emphasized that the appellant had the opportunity to present their case but failed to do so, leading to the rejection of the appeal on both substantive and procedural grounds. The judgment highlighted the importance of adherence to procedural requirements and the need for parties to actively participate in legal proceedings to ensure a fair and just resolution.Overall, the judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Ahmedabad underscored the significance of accurate registration and payment of service tax, emphasizing the responsibility of taxpayers to ensure compliance with tax regulations. The decision reaffirmed the principle that procedural rules must be followed diligently, and parties must actively engage in legal proceedings to safeguard their interests effectively.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found