SIGN IN SUBSCRIBE

News Update

US Nurse convicted of killing 17 patients - 700 yrs of jail-term awardedGST - Payment of pre-deposit through Form GST DRC-03 instead of the prescribed Form APL-01 - Petitioner attributes it to technical glitches - Respondent is the proper authority to decide the question of fact: HC2nd Session of India-Nigeria Joint Trade Committee held in AbujaGST - Since SCN is bereft of any details and suffers from infirmities that go to the root of the cause, SCN is quashed and set aside: HC1717 candidates to contest elections in phase 4 of Lok Sabha ElectionsGST - Once Appellate Authority comes to the conclusion that SCN was issued by an officer who was not competent; reply was also considered by an incompetent authority and the Competent Authority had not applied its independent mind, Appellate Authority could not have assumed original jurisdiction and proceeded further with the matter: HC7th India-Indonesia Joint Defence Cooperation Committee meeting held in New DelhiGST - Neither the Show Cause Notice nor the order spell out the reasons for retrospective cancellation of registration, therefore, the same cannot be sustained: HCMining sector registers record production in FY 2023-24GST - If the proper officer was of the view that the reply is unclear and unsatisfactory, he could have sought further details by providing such opportunity - Having failed to do so, order cannot be sustained - Matter remanded: HCAnother quake of 6.0 magnitude rocks Philippines; No damage reported so farI-T - Initial burden of proof rested on assessee to substantiate his claim of having incurred expenditure on improvement of property: ITATTrade ban: Israel hits back against Turkey with counter-measuresI-T - Agricultural income can be treated by ITO as undisclosed income in absence of any substantial / corroborative material to prove same: ITATCanada arrests three persons in alleged killing of Sikh separatistI-T - Income from sale of property has to be classified & characterised only in manner of computation as per section 45(2): ITATCus - When there is nothing on record to show that appellant had connived with other three persons to import AA batteries under the guise of declaring goods as Calcium Carbonate, penalty imposed on appellant are set aside: HCCongress fields Rahul Gandhi from Rae Bareli and Kishori Lal Sharma from AmethiGST -Since both the SCNs and orders pertain to same tax period raising identical demand by two different officers of same jurisdiction, proceedings on SCNs are clubbed and shall be re-adjudicated by one proper officer: HCFormer Jharkhand HC Chief Justice, Justice Sanjaya Kumar Mishra appointed as President of GST TribunalSale of building constructed on leasehold land - GST implicationI-T - Interest received u/s 28 of Land Acquisition Act 1894 awarded by Court is capital receipt being integral part of enhanced compensation and is exempt u/s 10(37): ITATGirl students advised by Pak college to keep away from political events
 
CX - Refund - Condition (h) of Notfn 5/2006 - failure to debit on date of filing refund claim is not such a lapse that it would debar appellants from refund: CESTAT

By TIOL News Service

MUMBAI, SEPT 30, 2015: THE appellants (EOU) filed a claim under rule 5 of CCR, 2004 for refund of accumulated credit.

One of the conditions in notification 5/2006 CE-(NT), namely condition (h) prescribes that the amount that is claimed as a refund under rule 5 shall be debited by the claimant from his CENVAT account at the time of making the claim.

The appellants filed a claim under rule 5 on 25.04.2013 but did not debit the amount in the CENVAT account at the time of filing the refund claim. They, however, debited the amount on 13.08.2013.

This was considered enough reason to reject the refund claim.

Incidentally, the amount claimed as refund was debited prior to issue of show-cause notice by the adjudicating authority. This is as per the reported submitted by the AR.

Moreover, even from the date of debit, the claim was not time barred.

The Commissioner (Appeals) was not impressed and he too denied the refund claim on the same grounds. He further stated that the appellants had not submitted any documentary proof evidencing debiting of the said amount on the later date.

The matter is before the CESTAT and the Bench held -

"3. … The short question to be decided is if the refund can be granted to the appellant's when they have debited the amount not on the date of filing refund claim but on a later date. It is seen that the conditions prescribed in the notification having met although on a later date. The failure to debit on the date of filing the refund claim is not such a lapse that it would debar the appellants from the refund. On the day of debiting the CENVAT account they have fulfilled the conditions of the notification. In that event they become entitled to refund on that date. In view of above the impugned order is set aside, the appeal is allowed with consequential benefit. The matter is remanded for the limited matter of verification of arithmetical accuracy of refund. The same is directed to be completed within a period of 30 days from the receipt of this order and refund issued."

In passing: Time and tide wait for none…not always!

(See 2015-TIOL-2076-CESTAT-MUM)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

TIOL Tube Latest

TIOL Tube
Shri N K Singh, recipient of TIOL FISCAL HERITAGE AWARD 2023, delivering his acceptance speech at Fiscal Awards event held on April 6, 2024 at Taj Mahal Hotel, New Delhi.

TOP NEWS

AR not Afar by SK Rahman

VISION 360



Shri Ram Nath Kovind, Hon'ble 14th President of India, addressing the gathering at TIOL Special Awards event.

TII LATEST

TIOLCORPLAWS LATEST