Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
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.
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: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    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
      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

        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>Appellant entitled to refund of unutilized CENVAT credit following business closure and service tax registration surrender</h1> <h3>M/s. R.S. Developers & Associates Versus The Commissioner of GST, CX & Customs, Bhubaneswar-I</h3> M/s. R.S. Developers & Associates Versus The Commissioner of GST, CX & Customs, Bhubaneswar-I - TMI ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDEREDThe core legal question considered in this judgment is whether the appellant is entitled to a refund of unutilized CENVAT credit lying in the CENVAT account at the time of surrendering service tax registration following the closure of business. Additionally, the issue of whether the appellant is entitled to interest on the refund amount under Section 11BB of the Central Excise Act, 1944, was also considered.ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSISRefund of Unutilized CENVAT CreditRelevant legal framework and precedents: The appellant relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in Union of India vs. Slovak India Trading Co Pvt. Ltd., which allowed the refund of unutilized CENVAT credit when an assessee exits the CENVAT scheme or closes the business. The Tribunal also considered similar cases such as M/S. International Engineering Agencies V. Commissioner and Lalit Kumar Arya v. Commissioner, which supported the appellant's claim.Court's interpretation and reasoning: The Tribunal observed that Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, while primarily addressing export scenarios, does not expressly prohibit refunds in other circumstances. The Tribunal noted that the CENVAT credit is a vested right of the assessee and should not be extinguished due to business closure.Key evidence and findings: It was undisputed that the appellant was eligible for the unutilized credit of the invoice raised by the contractor. The appellant had surrendered their service tax registration and was no longer rendering services.Application of law to facts: The Tribunal applied the legal principles established in previous judgments to the appellant's case, concluding that the appellant is entitled to a refund of the unutilized CENVAT credit.Treatment of competing arguments: The respondent argued that there is no provision in the CENVAT Credit rules for refunding unutilized credit. However, the Tribunal rejected this argument, citing precedents that allow such refunds.Conclusions: The Tribunal concluded that the appellant is eligible for the refund of unutilized CENVAT credit.Interest on Refund AmountRelevant legal framework and precedents: The appellant claimed interest under Section 11BB of the Central Excise Act, 1944, which mandates interest if a refund is not processed within three months. The Tribunal referred to cases like Z Konark v. Commissioner and Parle Agro Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner, which supported the claim for interest.Court's interpretation and reasoning: The Tribunal found that the appellant filed the refund application within the stipulated time and was wrongfully denied the refund. Therefore, the appellant is entitled to interest from three months after the refund application until the actual refund date.Key evidence and findings: The appellant's timely filing of the refund application and the wrongful denial of the refund were key factors.Application of law to facts: The Tribunal applied Section 11BB to determine the appellant's entitlement to interest.Treatment of competing arguments: The respondent argued against the provision for interest on such refunds, but the Tribunal dismissed this argument based on established precedents.Conclusions: The Tribunal concluded that the appellant is entitled to interest on the refund amount as per Section 11BB.SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGSThe Tribunal held that the appellant is eligible for the refund of unutilized CENVAT credit, citing the principle that CENVAT credit is a vested right and should not be extinguished due to business closure. The Tribunal also determined that the appellant is entitled to interest on the refund amount under Section 11BB of the Central Excise Act, 1944, from three months after the refund application date until the actual refund date.Final Determinations(i) The appellant is eligible for the refund of unutilized CENVAT credit of Rs. 5,58,015/-.(ii) The appellant is eligible for interest as per Section 11BB of the Central Excise Act from three months after the date of application until the date of grant of refund.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found