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...
Denial of Preferential Treatment under SAFTA overturned where unchallenged Country of Origin certificate warranted exemption under Notification benefi...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
6881 to 6900 of 96332 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Refund claims arising from an appellate order must be filed within one year from the date of that order under Section 27(1B)(b); the later filing here was therefore time-barred. The Tribunal also held that Section 26 did not apply because the case was not one of return or re-importation of exported goods, and in any event that provision contained its own time requirement, which was not met. The pending Revenue appeal did not alter the statutory limitation period. The rejection of the refund application on limitation grounds was upheld.
Refund claims arising from an appellate order must be filed within one year from the date of that order under Section 27(1B)(b); the later filing here was therefore time-barred. The Tribunal also held that Section 26 did not apply because the case was not one of return or re-importation of exported goods, and in any event that provision contained its own time requirement, which was not met. The pending Revenue appeal did not alter the statutory limitation period. The rejection of the refund application on limitation grounds was upheld.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.