PMLA anticipatory bail requires satisfaction of twin conditions, while predicate-offence protection does not extend to independent money-laundering pr...
School-affiliation charges remain taxable where not directly connected with examinations, while extended limitation requires proof of deliberate tax e...
The case involved CENVAT credit on CVD and SAD components under CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. The tribunal held that the appellant was entitled to a refund as they could not avail of the credit due to filing limitations. The appellant contested a previous court decision, stating it was not applicable to their case. The tribunal also ruled that cash refund of CVD/SAD was permissible u/s 142(3) of the CGST Act, citing a previous case. The Doctrine of Necessity was applied, allowing the refund due to non-availability of credit under GST regime. The appellant was granted the refund u/s 142(3) and (6) of the GST Act, setting aside the previous order.
The case involved CENVAT credit on CVD and SAD components under CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. The tribunal held that the appellant was entitled to a refund as they could not avail of the credit due to filing limitations. The appellant contested a previous court decision, stating it was not applicable to their case. The tribunal also ruled that cash refund of CVD/SAD was permissible u/s 142(3) of the CGST Act, citing a previous case. The Doctrine of Necessity was applied, allowing the refund due to non-availability of credit under GST regime. The appellant was granted the refund u/s 142(3) and (6) of the GST Act, setting aside the previous order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.