<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Legal Flaw: Order Exceeds Show-Cause Notice Scope in CENVAT Credit Refund Dispute; Misclassification as Intermediary Challenged.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=57402</link>
    <description>Scope of SCN - Refund of unutilized CENVAT credit of service tax - When the show-cause notice dt. 28/03/2014 was issued when the appellant filed the refund claim and the grounds raised in the show-cause notice was lack of nexus, claim is time barred and lack of documentation or discrepancies in documents; whereas when the Order-in-Original dt. 16/01/2018 was passed, the original authority travelled beyond the show-cause notice and came to a finding that the sales, marketing and administrative services are classified as BAS provided in India and hence Rule 6A not fulfilled and the appellant is acting as an intermediary. - Thus, the impugned order is bad in law as it has travelled beyond the show-cause notice and also on merit - AT</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 31 Mar 2021 12:00:22 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 31 Mar 2021 12:00:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=640432" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Legal Flaw: Order Exceeds Show-Cause Notice Scope in CENVAT Credit Refund Dispute; Misclassification as Intermediary Challenged.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=57402</link>
      <description>Scope of SCN - Refund of unutilized CENVAT credit of service tax - When the show-cause notice dt. 28/03/2014 was issued when the appellant filed the refund claim and the grounds raised in the show-cause notice was lack of nexus, claim is time barred and lack of documentation or discrepancies in documents; whereas when the Order-in-Original dt. 16/01/2018 was passed, the original authority travelled beyond the show-cause notice and came to a finding that the sales, marketing and administrative services are classified as BAS provided in India and hence Rule 6A not fulfilled and the appellant is acting as an intermediary. - Thus, the impugned order is bad in law as it has travelled beyond the show-cause notice and also on merit - AT</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 Mar 2021 12:00:22 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=57402</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>