Transfer-pricing treatment of ITeS margins excludes pass-through tax recoveries and separate delayed-receivables interest after working-capital adjust...
Capacity-utilisation adjustments under TNMM can neutralise substantiated COVID-related idle costs where underutilisation materially affects profitabil...
TNMM functional comparability requires excluding rice manufacturers from a pure Basmati rice trader's benchmark and recognising operating export recei...
Working-capital adjustment subsumes delayed-receivable effects in TNMM benchmarking of captive software-development services, avoiding separate notion...
Transfer-pricing comparability requires exclusion of financially illogical super-profit comparables and correction of unsupported annual-report and ma...
Charitable character assessment preserves Section 80G approval despite inclusive spiritual teachings and incidental religious expenditure within the s...
Penalty proceedings for cash-loan acceptance require assessment proceedings and recorded Assessing Officer satisfaction; absent these, the proceedings...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96556 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 allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order, and held that the appellant is entitled to a cash refund of Cenvat credit for CVD and SAD paid post-GST regime on imports made prior to 01.07.2017. The tribunal clarified that Section 142(3) of the CGST Act, a transitional provision, permits refund where Cenvat credit could not be availed due to the supersession of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 by the GST regime. The principle against unjust enrichment did not apply as the appellant bore the incidence of duty. The department's contention that the appellant could not claim credit under the new rules was rejected, given the payments related to pre-GST imports and the refund claim was valid. The decision aligns with prior tribunal rulings confirming that differential duty paid post-GST on pre-GST imports qualifies for refund under the statutory framework.
The CESTAT allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order, and held that the appellant is entitled to a cash refund of Cenvat credit for CVD and SAD paid post-GST regime on imports made prior to 01.07.2017. The tribunal clarified that Section 142(3) of the CGST Act, a transitional provision, permits refund where Cenvat credit could not be availed due to the supersession of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 by the GST regime. The principle against unjust enrichment did not apply as the appellant bore the incidence of duty. The department's contention that the appellant could not claim credit under the new rules was rejected, given the payments related to pre-GST imports and the refund claim was valid. The decision aligns with prior tribunal rulings confirming that differential duty paid post-GST on pre-GST imports qualifies for refund under the statutory framework.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.