Time-share accommodation classification excludes Club or Association Service where purchasers receive contractual occupancy rights without genuine mem...
CENVAT credit for trading requires reversal, while taxable-service rental credit remains proportionately available and limitation issues await resolut...
Vicarious liability for dishonoured company cheques may extend to non-signatory directors where complaints contain foundational responsibility avermen...
Charitable registration turns on predominant purpose and genuine activities, while incidental fees and related-party rent require supporting adverse m...
Page of 4794
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
121 to 140 of 95875 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.