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

2016 (11) TMI 1328 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH

2016 (11) TMI 1328 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH - TMI - Benefit of Notification No.56/02-CE dated 14.11.2002 - rejection of refund claims - as per Notification No. 19/08-CE dated 27.3.2008, the refund claim is restricted to the value addition by the assessee - Held that: - The appellant is located in the State of Jammu and Kashmir and availing the benefit of Notification No.56 /02-CE dated 14.11.2002. The appellant is claiming the refund under the Notification No.56/02-CE dated 14.11.2002 i.e. whatever d .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ed the appellants would release to the respondent-entrepreneur 50% of the amount due to them in terms of the judgement of the learned Single Judge, subject to furnishing solvent surety to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Commissioner within a period of four weeks of their furnishing the said surety. - In view of above order of the Hon'ble High Court, the appellant is entitled for refund as per the order of the Hon'ble High Court dated 21.5.2013 - appeal allowed - decided in favor of ap .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tification No.56/02-CE dated 14.11.2002. As per the said notification, whatever duty has been paid by the assessee through PLA is entitled to self refund. During the impugned period, the appellant filed refund claims which were rejected on the ground that as per Notification No. 19/08-CE dated 27.3.2008, the refund claim is restricted to the value addition by the assessee. The contention of the Commissioner in the impugned order is that the appellants have not challenged validity of the Notifica .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Hon'ble Jammu & Kashmir High Court and obtained stay order against the operation of the said notification. In that, circumstance, the finding of the Commissioner is baseless and the impugned order is set aside. 4. Learned AR reiterated the findings of the impugned order. 5. Heard both sides and considered the submissions. 6. The facts of the case have not been disputed by either of the sides which are as follows: The appellant is located in the State of Jammu and Kashmir and availing the .....

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