SIGN IN SUBSCRIBE

News Update

PM-STIAC discusses accelerating Industry-Academia Partnership for Research and InnovationIndia, Singapore hold dialogue over cyber policy44 bids received under 10th Round of Commercial Coal Mine AuctionsCops arrest former Dy PM of Nepal in cooperative fraud casePuri highlights India's Petrochemical potential at India Chem 2024UN reports record high cocaine production in ColombiaMinister unveils 'Aviation Park' showcasing India's Aviation HeritageED finds PFI wanted to start Islamic movement in IndiaBlocking Credit - Rule 86ASEBI says investors can use 3-in-1 accounts to apply online for securitiesI-T- Penalty u/s 271(1)(b) need not be imposed when assessee moved an adjournment application & later complied with notice u/s 142(1): ITAT4 Kanwariyas killed as vehicle runs over them in Banka, BiharI-T- Accounting principles do not prescribe maintaining of a day-to-day stock register, and the books of accounts cannot be rejected on this basis alone: ITATUN food looted and diverted to army in EthiopiaCus - Alleged breach of conditions for operating public bonded warehouse; CESTAT rightly rejected allegations, having found no evidence of any such breach: HCUS budget deficit surges beyond USD 1.8 trillionST - Onus for proving admissibility of Cenvat Credit rests with service provider under Rule 9(6) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004: CESTATIf China goes into Taiwan, Trump promises to impose additional tariffsRussians love Indian films; Putin lauds BollywoodCus - Classification of goods is to be determined in accordance with Customs Tariff Act & General Interpretative Rules; Country-of-Origin Certificate may offer some guidance, but cannot solely dictate classification: CESTATCus - Benefit of such Country-of-Origin certificates cannot be denied if all relevant conditions are met under the applicable Customs Tariff rules: CESTATCuban power grid collapses; Country plunges into darknessCus - As per trite law, merely claiming a classification or exemption does not constitute mis-declaration or suppression - any misclassification does not equate to willful intent to evade duty: CESTATKarnataka mulling over 2% fee on aggregator platforms to bankroll gig worker welfare fundCus - Extended limitation cannot be invoked in case of assessee who is a regular importer with a consistent classification approach: CESTAT
 
ST - Refund - Rule 5 of CCR, 2004 - Dy. Commr.rejecting refund claim by passing similar orders & by applying some general rule although HC on earlier occasion directed him to consider refund applications in accordance with law - Order quashed and matter remanded: High Court

By TIOL News Service

MUMBAI, MAY 20, 2014: THE Petitioner is holder of Service Tax Registration for providing taxable services, particularly, financial services. The Petitioner availed CENVAT credit of service tax paid on input services used in or in relation to provision of taxable output services. Since the services rendered by the Petitioner qualify as export, they are not liable to service tax. The CENVAT credit availed by the Petitioner remains unutilized. The law provides for refund of such unutilized CENVAT credit on account of export of output services.

The Petitioner claimed refund but the Deputy Commissioner rejected the same.

Against this rejection, the petitioner has filed a Writ Petition and pleads that the order be quashed and set aside.

It is submitted that similar exercise was carried out by the department earlier and the High Court in its writ jurisdiction was pleased to quash and set aside the order and direct reconsideration of the refund claim. That refund claim pertained to the period April, 2012 to June, 2012 and July, 2012 to September, 2012 whereas the present Writ Petition pertains to an identical refund claim, but for the period October, 2012 to December, 2012 .

It is prayed that the refund claim could not have been rejected in the manner done by the Respondent; that the order is clearly vitiated in law; that the Respondent is bent on passing similar orders although he was aware that the orders passed by him earlier and taking such view were quashed and set aside by this Court.

The High Court observed that the respondent had rejected the claim for refund adopting identical reasoning and although the High Court on earlier occasion had directed the respondent to consider the refund applications in accordance with the law laid down by the Court the refund claims have been considered not taking into account individual facts and circumstances, but by applying some general rule.

Without expressing any opinion on merits of the refund claim, the High Court quashed and set aside the order and directed the Deputy Commissioner of Service Tax to consider the refund claim afresh in accordance with the law and pass a fresh order within four weeks.

The Writ petition was disposed of.

In passing : Order passed in WP 2612/2014 is dated 21.03.2014. The order passed by the Dy. Commr. is dated 24.02.2014.

(See 2014-TIOL-769-HC-MUM-ST )


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

TIOL Tube Latest

TIOL Tube
Shri Samrat Choudhary, Hon’ble Deputy CM & FM of State of Bihar, delivering inaugural speech at TIOL Tax Congress 2024.

TOP NEWS


AR not Afar by SK Rahman

VISION 360



Justice A K Patnaik, Mentor to Hon'ble Jury for TIOL Awards 2024, addressing the gathering at the event.

TII LATEST

TIOLCORPLAWS LATEST