Necessary-party requirements limit impleadment of independent entities, while deferred consideration does not create an appealable adverse determinati...
Food supplement classification requires common parlance and authoritative tests, preventing treatment as proprietary Ayurvedic medicines without suppo...
Specified regulatory authority income receives conditional tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income character, and return f...
Tax exemption for regulatory authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-filing...
Input tax credit conditions remain constitutionally valid, with eligible recipient claims considered under GST circulars and retrospective filing dead...
Refund of accumulated CENVAT credit on exported services is not barred merely because credit from an earlier period is claimed in a subsequent quarter. Notification No. 5/2006-CE (NT) and the Board clarification permit carry-forward, subject to limitation and other claim requirements. For reverse-charge service tax paid belatedly, limitation runs from the actual tax-payment date; a period stated incorrectly in the application may be treated as a clerical error where returns establish the payment date. Both Members agreed that the refund rejection could not stand on those grounds. They differed on whether issues beyond the show cause notice required remand or whether refund with interest should be granted, and referred that question to a Third Member.
Refund of accumulated CENVAT credit on exported services is not barred merely because credit from an earlier period is claimed in a subsequent quarter. Notification No. 5/2006-CE (NT) and the Board clarification permit carry-forward, subject to limitation and other claim requirements. For reverse-charge service tax paid belatedly, limitation runs from the actual tax-payment date; a period stated incorrectly in the application may be treated as a clerical error where returns establish the payment date. Both Members agreed that the refund rejection could not stand on those grounds. They differed on whether issues beyond the show cause notice required remand or whether refund with interest should be granted, and referred that question to a Third Member.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.