Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
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 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
