Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Page of 4798
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
341 to 360 of 95957 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Refund of Service Tax - time limitation - Exercise of power u/s 142(3) of GST Act for refund of service tax - The case involves the rejection of a refund claim by the Appellant based on limitation, which was upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals). The Appellant argues that the cause of action for refund arose upon refunding the service tax amount, not the payment date. Additionally, the Appellant contends that GST laws do not provide for the refund of service tax. The jurisdiction of the Tribunal over refund claims is also questioned, but it is established that the Tribunal has jurisdiction under Section 142 of the CGST Act. The validity of refund applications is upheld by citing past decisions of the Tribunal.
Refund of Service Tax - time limitation - Exercise of power u/s 142(3) of GST Act for refund of service tax - The case involves the rejection of a refund claim by the Appellant based on limitation, which was upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals). The Appellant argues that the cause of action for refund arose upon refunding the service tax amount, not the payment date. Additionally, the Appellant contends that GST laws do not provide for the refund of service tax. The jurisdiction of the Tribunal over refund claims is also questioned, but it is established that the Tribunal has jurisdiction under Section 142 of the CGST Act. The validity of refund applications is upheld by citing past decisions of the Tribunal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
