GST Helpdesk   Subscription   Demo   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (9) TMI 584 - CESTAT MUMBAI

2016 (9) TMI 584 - CESTAT MUMBAI - 2016 (45) S.T.R. 131 (Tri. - Mumbai) - Refund claim - credit was wrongly availed on the invoices issued to the Hyderabad office of the assessee - Hyderabad office does not find place in registration certificate - Held that:- considering that there is no dispute about the receipt of services by the respondent and the utilisation thereof being permissible even without registration under Finance Act, 1994, the rejection of invoices raised on an address that is not .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

yond the period of one year specified in section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944 - relevant date is the last day of the relevant quarter of receipt of FIRCs instead of the dates on which the FIRCs had been issued is not in accordance with the notification 27/2012-CE(NT) dated 18th June 2012 - Held that:- the settled law relating to the date of issue of FIRCs being acceptable for compliance to the procedure laid down in notification no. 27/2012-CE(NT). The restrictions imposed on filing of refund .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he Respondent : None This appeal has been filed by M/s S G Analytics Pvt Ltd against order-in-appeal no. PUN-EXCUS-003-APP-91 & 92-14-15 dated 13/10/2014 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Pune - III. The appellant who provides banking and financial services had sought refund under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules 2004 in two claims. The first claim for refund was allowed by the original authority to the extent of ₹ 1,03,205/- while an amount of ₹ 1,71,427/- .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ified in section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944 which has been adopted for processing of refund claims under notification 27/2012-CE(NT) dated 18th June 2012. It is also further contended that the respondents had availed CENVAT credit of ₹ 26,673/- for the earlier period and ₹ 88,461/- for the latter period against invoices issued in the name of the appellant s office situated at Hyderabad which does not find a place in the registration certificate. In the proceedings before the fir .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Learned Authorised Representative contends that registration is an essential pre-condition for availment of CENVAT credit and relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in Market Creators Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Vadodara [2014 (36) STR 386 (Tri.Ahd.)]. The first appellate authority had placed reliance on a catena of judgments of this Tribunal holding that registration is not a pre-condition for utilisation of credit if the primary condition of liability to duties/taxes had been di .....

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