Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Commissioner of Central Excise-I, Pune Versus SG Analytics Pvt. Ltd.

2016 (9) TMI 584 - CESTAT 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 included in the registration certificate would not sustain. The responden .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

, 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 claim cannot be further restricted by computing the deadline from the dat .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

td 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/- was rejected and in the second an amount of ₹ 1,49,544/-/ was sanct .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

r 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 first appellate authority, the entire claim was admitted except for ₹ 8 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ial 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 discharged by assessee when procuring inputs or receiving services. Learned .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| 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