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...
CESTAT allowed the appeal by way of remand, setting aside the Commissioner (Appeals) order and directing the adjudicating authority to re-determine the refund application. The Tribunal held that refunds accruing post-01.07.2017 fall under s.142(3) CGST Act and must be considered in cash where applicable, and that reliance on s.142(8)(a) was misplaced because duties were voluntarily paid on reconciliation, not pursuant to recovery proceedings. However, Rule 9(1)(b) CCR, 2004 may bar CENVAT credit where duty becomes recoverable due to fraud, collusion or willful suppression; where credit is disallowed, refund claims are unsustainable. Matter remanded for fresh adjudication in light of these observations.
CESTAT allowed the appeal by way of remand, setting aside the Commissioner (Appeals) order and directing the adjudicating authority to re-determine the refund application. The Tribunal held that refunds accruing post-01.07.2017 fall under s.142(3) CGST Act and must be considered in cash where applicable, and that reliance on s.142(8)(a) was misplaced because duties were voluntarily paid on reconciliation, not pursuant to recovery proceedings. However, Rule 9(1)(b) CCR, 2004 may bar CENVAT credit where duty becomes recoverable due to fraud, collusion or willful suppression; where credit is disallowed, refund claims are unsustainable. Matter remanded for fresh adjudication in light of these observations.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
