Concessional Basic Customs Duty on Ethernet switches: classification as enterprise switches upheld, challenge dismissed for lack of substantial law qu...
Insolvency petition based on admitted debt and default upheld; challenge for malicious initiation rejected, settlement may proceed under resolution fr...
Quashing of FIR and challenge to ECIR over alleged diversion of funds and preferential ESOP pricing dismissed after prima facie money-laundering findi...
Cash refund under Section 142(9)(b) of the CGST Act was held not to be deniable merely because transitional credit was not carried forward in TRAN-1, since an assessee may opt for the more beneficial statutory route and claim refund instead of transition. On the alleged mismatch between ST-3 returns and supporting documents, the Tribunal found the documents reflected input service credit while the return mistakenly showed input credit; as the credit was admittedly availed and the error did not undermine entitlement or indicate mala fides, denial of refund was unjustified. The impugned order was set aside and the appeal was allowed. - CESTAT
Cash refund under Section 142(9)(b) of the CGST Act was held not to be deniable merely because transitional credit was not carried forward in TRAN-1, since an assessee may opt for the more beneficial statutory route and claim refund instead of transition. On the alleged mismatch between ST-3 returns and supporting documents, the Tribunal found the documents reflected input service credit while the return mistakenly showed input credit; as the credit was admittedly availed and the error did not undermine entitlement or indicate mala fides, denial of refund was unjustified. The impugned order was set aside and the appeal was allowed. - CESTAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.