Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
The CESTAT dismissed Revenue's appeal against refund granted to a 100% EOU. The Tribunal held that Revenue improperly issued SCNs under Section 73 without first revising the refund orders under Section 84, which was the mandatory procedure per the Delhi HC ruling in BT India. The Tribunal determined that questioning the nexus between input and output services during refund proceedings was improper, as eligibility for credit must be determined separately before refund claims. Additionally, procedural issues like non-production of original FIRCs or invoice discrepancies should not prevent substantive benefits. The extended period of limitation was invalid as SCNs were issued beyond the two-year limitation period prescribed under Section 84.
The CESTAT dismissed Revenue's appeal against refund granted to a 100% EOU. The Tribunal held that Revenue improperly issued SCNs under Section 73 without first revising the refund orders under Section 84, which was the mandatory procedure per the Delhi HC ruling in BT India. The Tribunal determined that questioning the nexus between input and output services during refund proceedings was improper, as eligibility for credit must be determined separately before refund claims. Additionally, procedural issues like non-production of original FIRCs or invoice discrepancies should not prevent substantive benefits. The extended period of limitation was invalid as SCNs were issued beyond the two-year limitation period prescribed under Section 84.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
