Faceless reassessment jurisdiction turned on retrospective AO definition, with later faceless-assessment changes treated as clarificatory and procedur...
Page of 4807
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
2161 to 2180 of 96140 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The CESTAT upheld the Commissioner's order denying the appellant's refund claim for duty paid on UF/PF resin used captively, affirming the application of the principle of unjust enrichment. The Tribunal relied on Supreme Court precedents establishing that in cases of captive consumption, the burden lies on the claimant to prove non-transfer of duty. The refund amount of Rs. 51,33,004.71, though acknowledged as paid, is required to be credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund under Section 12C of the Central Excise Act. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, confirming the revenue's entitlement to recover the erroneously sanctioned refund and directing appropriate legal action.
The CESTAT upheld the Commissioner's order denying the appellant's refund claim for duty paid on UF/PF resin used captively, affirming the application of the principle of unjust enrichment. The Tribunal relied on Supreme Court precedents establishing that in cases of captive consumption, the burden lies on the claimant to prove non-transfer of duty. The refund amount of Rs. 51,33,004.71, though acknowledged as paid, is required to be credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund under Section 12C of the Central Excise Act. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, confirming the revenue's entitlement to recover the erroneously sanctioned refund and directing appropriate legal action.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4807 
Join Channel 
