GST Helpdesk   Subscription   Demo   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
What's New Case Laws Highlights Articles News Forum Short Notes Statutory TMI SMS More ...
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2017 (4) TMI 939 - CESTAT HYDERABAD

2017 (4) TMI 939 - CESTAT HYDERABAD - TMI - Refund claim - unjust enrichment - denial on the ground that the amount deposited by them during the investigation is shown in their books of account as expenditure and not as receivable - Held that: - Undisputedly, the amount has been deposited during the investigation proceedings. It is in the nature of a pre-deposit. The appellant has deposited the amount of ₹ 3,38,749/- during investigation only with an intention of reducing the burden in cas .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ORDER [Order Per Ms. Sulekha Beevi, C.S.] 1. The above appeal is filed against rejection of refund claim. 2. The appellants are manufacturers of sponge iron and are availing the facility of CENVAT credit on capital goods and inputs. A show cause notice dated 05.05.2008 was issued to the appellants alleging irregular credit availed by them to the tune of ₹ 29,69,276/- on boilers, water treatment plant and their parts installed solely for generation of steam which is exempted from duty and .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

(Appeals) against this order challenging the credit of ₹ 3,38,749/- allowed in respect of water treatment plant which was not installed in their unit and not reflected in the books of account of appellant. The appellant filed cross objections in the said department appeal. While Order-in-Appeal dated 19.11.2009, the Commissioner (Appeals) remanded the matter with regard to demand of ₹ 3,38,749/- to the adjudicating authority. 3. Meanwhile, the appellant had filed refund claim for &# .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ng the investigation is shown in their books of account as expenditure and not as receivable. That, therefore, the incidence of duty has been passed on and the refund claim is hit by unjust enrichment. The appellants are, thus, before the Tribunal. 5. As per the remand order, the adjudicating authority had passed denovo order dated 16.08.2010 in which it was held that the appellants are eligible for credit of ₹ 3,38,749/- in regard to water treatment plant. 6. On behalf of the appellant, L .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Latest Notifications:

    Dated      Category

20-7-2017 Cus (NT)

20-7-2017 GST CESS Rate

19-7-2017 IT

19-7-2017 IT

18-7-2017 IT

18-7-2017 CE (NT)

18-7-2017 CE

18-7-2017 GST CESS Rate

15-7-2017 Kerala SGST

14-7-2017 Andhra Pradesh SGST

14-7-2017 Cus (NT)

14-7-2017 Cus

13-7-2017 Co. Law

13-7-2017 Co. Law

13-7-2017 ADD

13-7-2017 ADD

12-7-2017 Jammu & Kashmir SGST

12-7-2017 Gujarat SGST

12-7-2017 Gujarat SGST

12-7-2017 CGST Rate

More Notifications


Latest Circulars:

19-7-2017 Goods and Services Tax

19-7-2017 Income Tax

18-7-2017 Customs

17-7-2017 Customs

14-7-2017 Income Tax

13-7-2017 Central Excise

13-7-2017 Customs

13-7-2017 Central Excise

13-7-2017 Customs

7-7-2017 Income Tax

More Circulars



|| 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