Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Page of 4816
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
641 to 660 of 96301 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Refund of service tax paid under a claimed mistake of law remained subject to the statutory refund mechanism under section 11B, including the prescribed limitation period and unjust enrichment test. Relying on Mafatlal Industries and Southern Surface Finishers, the CESTAT held that later realisation that tax was not payable did not displace statutory limits, and the assessee failed to prove that the tax burden had not been passed on to customers. The refund rejection on both limitation and unjust enrichment was sustained, and the appeal was dismissed.
Refund of service tax paid under a claimed mistake of law remained subject to the statutory refund mechanism under section 11B, including the prescribed limitation period and unjust enrichment test. Relying on Mafatlal Industries and Southern Surface Finishers, the CESTAT held that later realisation that tax was not payable did not displace statutory limits, and the assessee failed to prove that the tax burden had not been passed on to customers. The refund rejection on both limitation and unjust enrichment was sustained, and the appeal was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4816 
Join Channel 
