SIGN IN SUBSCRIBE

News Update

CLAT 2024 exams to be held on Dec 1NCGG commences Programme for officials of TanzaniaGST - Appellate Authority has not noticed the provisions of Section 12 of the Limitation Act, 1963 which mandates that the day on which the judgment complained of was pronounced, is also to be excluded: HCDefence Secretary commends BRO for playing major role in country's securityGST - If the Proper Officer was of the view that the reply filed was insufficient, he could have sought more clarification - Without providing any such opportunity, impugned order could not have been passed - Matter remanded: HCSC holds influencers, celebrities equally accountable for misleading adsGST - Notice requiring petitioner to furnish additional information/clarification does not mention that petitioner had to appear for personal hearing - Since no opportunity of personal hearing was given, order is unsustainable: HCIndian Naval ships arrive at Singapore; to head towards South China SeaGST - For the purposes of DNB and FNB courses, petitioner clearly falls within the scope of an educational institution imparting education to students enrolled with it as a part of a curriculum - Services exempted: HCIndia's MEDTECH industry holds immense potential: Dr Arunish ChawlaKejriwal’s judicial custody extended till May 20GST - Candidates appearing for the screening tests are not students of the petitioner - Petitioner's claim of exemption on such examination fees is unmerited: HCBrisk voting reported from all 96 LS seats; PM casts vote in AhmedabadGST - NEET examinations are in the nature of an entrance examination - Petitioner would be entitled to the benefit of an exemption by virtue of Serial No.66(aa) of the 2017 Notification, which came into effect on 25.01.2018: HCIndia calls back half of troops stationed at MaldivesIndia-Australia DTAA: Economic Statecraft through TaxRBI alerts against misuse of banking channels for facilitating illegal forex tradingTime Limit to file Appeal in GST Appellate TribunalEC censures Jagan Reddy & Chandrababu Naidu for MCC violationsFrance tells Xi Jinping EU needs protection from China’s cheap importsI-T- Addition cannot be made merely for reason that assessee got property transferred through registered sale without making payment to vendor: ITATI-T- Addition which is not based on the reasons for reopening is un-sustainable sans notice u/s 148 of the ACT: ITATOxygen valve malfunction delays launch of Boeing’s first crewed spacecraftFM administers Oath to Justice Sanjaya Kumar Mishra as first President of GST TribunalGhana agrees to activate UPI links in 6 monthsED seizes about 20 kg gold from locker of a cyber scammer in Haryana
 
Once it is an admitted position that it is only AA which has jurisdiction to decide whether interest on refund claim should be granted, there was no reason for CESTAT to have decided issue: HC

By TIOL News Service

MUMBAI, OCT 23, 2017: A Refund claim filed by the appellant was rejected by the original authority. The Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the order and remanded the matter for fresh consideration. The Commissioner(A) directed the Appellant to make available ticket books for verification of the Department.

Revenue challenged this order of remand.

The CESTAT observed, that at the material time,the Commissioner (Appeals) had no power to pass an order of remand. Secondly, it was found that the refund claim was rejected by the Adjudicating Authority on the ground that the Appellant had not produced relevant records.

The CESTAT remanded the matter to the original authority and in paragraph 7 also observed that the Appellant was not entitled to any interest on the amount of refund in the event the refund claim was allowed. This, the CESTAT observed,was because the refund claim was rejected as relevant records were not produced by the Appellant.

The appellant is before the High Court with the following substantial question of law –

"Whether after passing an order of remand to the Adjudicating Authority for deciding afresh the refund claim of the Appellant, CESTAT could have concluded the issue of entitlement of interest on the refund claim?"

The High Court observed -

"7. Once it is an admitted position that it is only the Adjudicating Authority which has jurisdiction to decide whether interest on refund claim should be granted, there was no reason for the CESTAT to have decided the issue of entitlement of the Appellant to claim interest on the refund claim. In fact, the adjudication on the question, whether the Appellant is entitled to refund is not yet made. In the event, the Adjudicating Authority is inclined to grant refund, the fact that at the relevant time necessary documents were not produced by the Appellant, is only a factor to be considered for consideration of the question of grant of interest. However, this factor may not be conclusive."

Concluding that the finding recorded in paragraph 7 of its order is completely erroneous, the Tribunal order was set aside and the matter as to whether the appellant was entitled for interest on the refund claim was kept open to be decided by the adjudicating authority.

The appeal was partly allowed.

(See 2017-TIOL-2197-HC-MUM-CX)


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