<?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>Entitlement to refund of CVD/SAD on excess imports under advance authorisation granted; refund to be paid in cash.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=96850</link>
    <description>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.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 13 Feb 2026 13:57:11 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 Feb 2026 13:57:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=886227" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Entitlement to refund of CVD/SAD on excess imports under advance authorisation granted; refund to be paid in cash.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=96850</link>
      <description>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.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 Feb 2026 13:57:11 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=96850</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>