Pre-amendment reassessment limitation bars late notices under the preserved regime, invalidating consequential reassessment for affected earlier asses...
Cash-sales explanations for bank deposits require documentary reconciliation; reassessment notice survived where effective response time was available...
Functional comparability in transfer pricing prevents ad hoc arm's length adjustments where functions, assets, risks and reliable comparables are unes...
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.