Composite GST notices, mandatory limitation, and same-subject bar: HC upheld valid notices but quashed overlapping proceedings and unauthorised withho...
Page of 4830
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3761 to 3780 of 96587 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Entitlement to refund of countervailing duty and special additional duty paid on excess imports under advance authorisation was asserted on the basis that post GST CENVAT credit was unavailable; transitional provisions require refunds accruing after GST implementation to be paid in cash and admissible credit refunded accordingly, and therefore the departmental rejection was incorrect. The tribunal found the refund claim complied with transitional cash refund rules and Section 142(6)(a) principles and directed allowance of the refund. The tribunal also held unjust enrichment did not bar refund because the refund amount was disclosed in financial statements and a chartered accountant certified non pass through of the duty incidence.
Entitlement to refund of countervailing duty and special additional duty paid on excess imports under advance authorisation was asserted on the basis that post GST CENVAT credit was unavailable; transitional provisions require refunds accruing after GST implementation to be paid in cash and admissible credit refunded accordingly, and therefore the departmental rejection was incorrect. The tribunal found the refund claim complied with transitional cash refund rules and Section 142(6)(a) principles and directed allowance of the refund. The tribunal also held unjust enrichment did not bar refund because the refund amount was disclosed in financial statements and a chartered accountant certified non pass through of the duty incidence.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.