Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

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>Tribunal Confirms Refund Eligibility for Excess Duty Paid</h1> <h3>Commissioner of Central GST, Pune II Versus Schindler India Pvt. Ltd.</h3> The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)'s decision, confirming the respondent's eligibility for a refund of excess duty paid. The decision ... Refund of excess paid excise duty - duty paying documents - doctrine of unjust enrichment - refund application filed by the respondent was rejected by the original authority on the ground that credit note cannot be accepted as conclusive evidence for claiming that excess duty had in fact been paid and incidence of such duty has not been passed on to any other person - HELD THAT:- The amount of refund in question, was reflected under the Head ‘Loans and Advances” with narration “Balance with statutory / government authorities”. Upon verification of the particulars reflected in the balance sheet and accounting records maintained by the respondent, the Chartered Accountant’s firm, by a certificate dated 31.08.2018, has given the breakup of the figure reflected in the balance sheet, which include of the amount in dispute, for which the respondent had filed the refund claim application. The records submitted by the respondent clearly demonstrate that the incidence of duty has all along been borne by it and the same has not been passed on to its buyer or to any other person. Since the excess duty initially paid was adjusted by issuance of credit note, such practice adopted by the respondent is in conformity with the accounting principles. The decision of this Tribunal relied upon by Revenue in the case of Addision & Co. [2002 (2) TMI 294 - CEGAT, CHENNAI] squarely covers the case of respondent inasmuch as it has been held that issuance of credit is also considered as the valid document for accounting adjustment. Appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. Issues:1. Eligibility for refund of excess duty paid due to error in the system.2. Doctrine of unjust enrichment and its applicability.3. Acceptance of credit note as conclusive evidence for refund claim.4. Verification of duty payment and passing on the incidence to customers.Analysis:Issue 1:The respondent, engaged in manufacturing elevator parts, paid excess duty due to a system error and sought a refund. The original authority rejected the refund application, questioning the conclusive evidence of excess duty payment. The Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the appeal, ruling in favor of the respondent, emphasizing the eligibility for refund and disregarding the doctrine of unjust enrichment. The decision was based on a certificate from a Chartered Accountant confirming the excess duty payment.Issue 2:The doctrine of unjust enrichment was a key point of contention. The Revenue argued that the respondent failed to provide evidence that the excess duty burden was not passed on to customers. However, the respondent successfully demonstrated through financial records and the Chartered Accountant's certificate that the duty incidence was not transferred, justifying the refund claim.Issue 3:The Revenue contended that the credit note issued by the respondent was insufficient evidence for claiming a refund. They highlighted the lack of correlation between goods cleared and customer transactions. The Tribunal, however, upheld the validity of the credit note as an accounting adjustment document, citing a previous case precedent.Issue 4:Upon reviewing the balance sheet and accounting records, it was evident that the excess duty payment was reflected under 'Loans and Advances,' indicating non-passing of the duty burden. The Chartered Accountant's certificate further supported the respondent's claim, confirming the correct accounting treatment of the excess duty payment through credit notes.In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal and upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)'s decision, affirming the respondent's eligibility for the refund of excess duty paid. The judgment emphasized the importance of proper documentation and accounting practices in supporting refund claims related to duty payments.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found