Condonation of refiling delay refused where repeated defects, lack of diligence and vague explanations defeated the appeal against resolution plan app...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
4401 to 4420 of 96556 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 accumulated CENVAT credit paid towards Service Tax on Reverse Charge Mechanism during April 2016 to June 2017 period is admissible in cash u/s 142(3) after the expiry of the transitional provision. The non-obstante clause in the pre-existing law permitted cash refund of eligible CENVAT credit, even though no express provision existed. Invoking the 'Doctrine of Necessity', the Appellant is entitled to the claimed refund with applicable interest. The Commissioner's order denying cash refund is set aside, and the appeal is allowed. The Tribunal's precedents and the Madras High Court judgment support granting cash refund as a dire necessity.
Refund of accumulated CENVAT credit paid towards Service Tax on Reverse Charge Mechanism during April 2016 to June 2017 period is admissible in cash u/s 142(3) after the expiry of the transitional provision. The non-obstante clause in the pre-existing law permitted cash refund of eligible CENVAT credit, even though no express provision existed. Invoking the 'Doctrine of Necessity', the Appellant is entitled to the claimed refund with applicable interest. The Commissioner's order denying cash refund is set aside, and the appeal is allowed. The Tribunal's precedents and the Madras High Court judgment support granting cash refund as a dire necessity.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.