Contact us   Feedback   Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (9) TMI 1031 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD

2015 (9) TMI 1031 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD - TMI - Denial of refund claim - payment of service tax which was not leviable - Bar of limitation - Unjust enrichment - held that:- Sanctioning of the amount of ₹ 76,400/- indicate that the issue of unjust enrichment and non chargeability of Service Tax on the activities of the appellants are not questioned by the Revenue. The only aspect which is required to be decided is whether limitations for filing refund claim, specified in Section 11-B of the Ce .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

9 (10) TMI 36 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] - Decided in favour of assessee. - Appeal No : ST/10002-10007/2014 - Order No. A/10340-10345/2015 - Dated:- 17-4-2015 - Mr. H.K. Thakur, J. For The Appellant : Shri M.R. Shah, Tax Counsultant For The Respondent:Shri S.K. Shukla, Authorised Representative Per: H.K. Thakur These appeals have been filed by the appellant with respect to OIA No. AHM-SVTAX-000-APP-241 to 245-13-14 dated 19.11.2013 and AHM-SVTX-000-APP-228-13-14 dated 06.11.2013. 2. Shri M.R. Shah (Ta .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e first appellate authority are not sustainable in view of, interalia, the following case laws:- (i) Swastik Sanitary Wares Ltd. vs. UOI - [2012 (37) STT 508 (27) Taxman. Com. 12 (Gujarat)] (ii) Commissioner of Central Excise, Banglore-III vs. Motorola India Pvt. Ltd. - [2008 (11) S.T.R. 555 (Kar.)] (iii) Gujarat Enginneering Works vs. Commissioner of Central Excise Ahmedabad-II - [ 2013 (292) E.L.T 547 (Tri. Ahmd.)] (iv) Natraj and Venkat Associates vs. Asst. Commr. of S.T., Chennai-II [2010 (1 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

00/- but rejected the remaining refund claim as time barred as per the orders of the first appellate authority. Sanctioning of the amount of ₹ 76,400/- indicate that the issue of unjust enrichment and non chargeability of Service Tax on the activities of the appellants are not questioned by the Revenue. The only aspect which is required to be decided is whether limitations for filing refund claim, specified in Section 11-B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 will be applicable to the amounts p .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

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

Go to Mobile Version