Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
The CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order, holding the appellant entitled to refund of unutilised CENVAT credit paid on input services used for export of services. The Tribunal accepted proof of export and inward remittances and applied Board guidance that one-to-one correlation between export invoices and FIRCs is not requisite for refund. It further rejected denial based on asserted lack of nexus between input and output services, finding such a ground insufficient to withhold refund where credit availing is otherwise not impeached. The Tribunal also held the relevant date for limitation may be the quarter-end when FIRCs are received for quarterly refund filings, negating delay objections.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.