Reversal of input tax credit in proportion to exempt supply: specificity of show-cause notice required; order set aside, fresh proceedings allowed wit...
Benami transaction and beneficial ownership: documentary and circumstantial evidence show payors were true beneficiaries, resulting in PBPTA consequen...
The Tribunal addressed (1) overlap of jurisdiction and principle of comity: finding the earlier Commissioner's order was non-original, lacked application of mind and risked "poaching" on concurrent proceedings, the Tribunal held such order excluded further support and set it aside - outcome: Commissioner's order quashed. (2) Eligibility for refund under rule 5, CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004: the Tribunal found rejection rested on absence of a prescribed mechanism to ascertain prospective use and that no show-cause specifying deficiencies was issued, depriving the applicant of opportunity to be heard - outcome: applications restored to the original authority for fresh adjudication in accordance with law and procedure; appeal allowed. - CESTAT
The Tribunal addressed (1) overlap of jurisdiction and principle of comity: finding the earlier Commissioner's order was non-original, lacked application of mind and risked "poaching" on concurrent proceedings, the Tribunal held such order excluded further support and set it aside - outcome: Commissioner's order quashed. (2) Eligibility for refund under rule 5, CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004: the Tribunal found rejection rested on absence of a prescribed mechanism to ascertain prospective use and that no show-cause specifying deficiencies was issued, depriving the applicant of opportunity to be heard - outcome: applications restored to the original authority for fresh adjudication in accordance with law and procedure; appeal allowed. - CESTAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
