Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
The CESTAT dismissed the appeal and upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)'s order-in-original rejecting the appellant's claim for cash refund of service tax paid under reverse charge mechanism (RCM) after GST commenced on 01.07.2017. The Tribunal found no legal entitlement under the pre-GST or GST statutory framework, including Section 174(2)(C) CGST, for a cash refund of unutilised CENVAT/credit arising from RCM payments; the appellant's reliance on natural-justice and case law was rejected. The Tribunal held the impugned orders contained no infirmity in law or fact and accordingly confirmed denial of refund, dismissing the appeal with respect to all contested refund claims.
The CESTAT dismissed the appeal and upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)'s order-in-original rejecting the appellant's claim for cash refund of service tax paid under reverse charge mechanism (RCM) after GST commenced on 01.07.2017. The Tribunal found no legal entitlement under the pre-GST or GST statutory framework, including Section 174(2)(C) CGST, for a cash refund of unutilised CENVAT/credit arising from RCM payments; the appellant's reliance on natural-justice and case law was rejected. The Tribunal held the impugned orders contained no infirmity in law or fact and accordingly confirmed denial of refund, dismissing the appeal with respect to all contested refund claims.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.