Online bond platforms may offer overseas-regulated products and tax-specific bonds subject to disclosures, compliance safeguards and revised complianc...
Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
The CESTAT held that the one-year period for filing a refund claim u/r 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, for exports made on a quarterly basis, commences from the end of the quarter in which the foreign exchange is received. Since the appellant filed the refund claim on 28.03.2018, within one year from the end of the quarter January-March 2017, the rejection of the refund of Rs. 93,39,310/- was not tenable. Consequently, the appeal was allowed.
The CESTAT held that the one-year period for filing a refund claim u/r 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, for exports made on a quarterly basis, commences from the end of the quarter in which the foreign exchange is received. Since the appellant filed the refund claim on 28.03.2018, within one year from the end of the quarter January-March 2017, the rejection of the refund of Rs. 93,39,310/- was not tenable. Consequently, the appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
