Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Case Laws Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Manuals News SMS Articles Highlights
← Previous Next →
  • Contents
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In


User Login
Stay sign in     

Forget password        New User/ Regiser


2014 (7) TMI 329

Head Note:
Refund claim - Relevant date for refund claim - Whether relevant date specified under Section 11B of Central Excise Act 1944 is relevant for refunds under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 read with Notification 5/2006-C.E. (N.T.) dated 14.03.2006 - Held that:- in the case of goods exported, the relevant date would be the date of export of goods but the same analogy may not be applicable in respect of relevant date for the purpose of refund. The liability to pay tax or duty arises in the case of manufactured goods as soon as they are manufactured whereas in the case of service tax till the law was amended, only when the consideration was received, the liability to pay tax arose. Without clearance of goods, the liability to pay tax does not arise and in the absence of liability to pay tax, further proceedings also would not happen. That being the situation, invariably even if the taxable event is manufacture, the calculation of tax took place after removal and for the purpose of calculation of duty liability it is always the date of removal that is considered - it would be appropriate that the relevant date for calculating the time limit under Section 11B also should be the date on which consideration is received. - Decision in the case of CCE, Pune-I Vs. Eaton Industries P. Ltd. [2010 (12) TMI 71 - CESTAT, MUMBAI] followed.

Nexus and the admissibility of CENVAT credit - Held that:- That in respect of construction services credit would be admissible and in respect of other services, we agree that the original authority should consider each service separately - issue relating to nexus as well as the admissibility of CENVAT credit are in favour of the assessee and a more detailed consideration of each service in the light of Infosys decision of this Tribunal would be appropriate as regards services other than construction service which we have not considered. - Decision in the case of Infosys Ltd. [2014 (3) TMI 695 - CESTAT BANGALORE] to be followed - matter remanded back. - Decided in favour of assessee.


← Previous Next →




Discussion Forum
what is new what is new

Let's just recapitulate:

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.