Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
Refund claim u/s 142(3) of CGST Act, 2017 read with Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1994 was partially allowed. Refund of Rs. 20,52,143/- and Rs. 2,19,004/- granted, appellant can approach GST authority for credit in electronic ledger. Refund of Rs. 41,244/- and Rs. 4,87,533/- initially rejected as paid after 01.07.2007, when no CENVAT credit provision existed. However, CESTAT relied on its previous decision in Shree Ganesh Remedies case, holding that Section 142(3) covers amounts accrued pre-GST regime, even if paid post 01.07.2017. Matter remanded to adjudicating authority to pass fresh order considering unjust enrichment, after processing refund claim for Rs. 41,244/- and Rs. 4,87,533/-.
Refund claim u/s 142(3) of CGST Act, 2017 read with Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1994 was partially allowed. Refund of Rs. 20,52,143/- and Rs. 2,19,004/- granted, appellant can approach GST authority for credit in electronic ledger. Refund of Rs. 41,244/- and Rs. 4,87,533/- initially rejected as paid after 01.07.2007, when no CENVAT credit provision existed. However, CESTAT relied on its previous decision in Shree Ganesh Remedies case, holding that Section 142(3) covers amounts accrued pre-GST regime, even if paid post 01.07.2017. Matter remanded to adjudicating authority to pass fresh order considering unjust enrichment, after processing refund claim for Rs. 41,244/- and Rs. 4,87,533/-.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
