Refund claim - the learned Commissioner (Appeals) is in error in ...

Central Excise

March 4, 2016

Refund claim - the learned Commissioner (Appeals) is in error in rejecting the refund, holding that once duty is shown in invoice, it is deemed to be passed on, as the presumption is rebuttable. Thus, the appeal is allowed. The assessee, is held, entitled to refund - AT

View Source

← Previous Next →

Refund claim - the learned Commissioner (Appeals) is in error in ...

Central Excise

March 4, 2016

You may also like:

Refund claim - unjust enrichment - value of the software is includable in the assessable value of hardware or not - The duty and the value are shown in the face of...

Refund of export duty paid in excess - conclusive evidence to discharge the burden of unjust enrichment - The CESTAT observed that the contract between the buyer and...

Refund of SAD - time limit of one year - the Commissioner(Appeals) has committed an error while giving an expanded interpretation qua limitation to favour assessee -...

Refund claim - when invoice showed duty and ex-duty price separately in invoice and on scrap being held non-excisable, refund of duty shown in invoice is not hit by bar...

Refund of wrongly paid Central Excise Duty on Retail Sale Price (Maximum Retail Price-MRP) - unjust enrichment - The authorities concluded that the appellant had passed...

Refund claim of 5% additional duty - even if there is no endorsement in the commercial invoices, the SAD of refund should be allowed. - AT

Refund claim of Terminal Excise Duty (TED) - Supply of manufactured goods to 100% EOU - Deemed export - refund cannot be denied on the ground that appellant is eligible...

Refund claim - excess duty paid due to downward revision of price - They have furnished CA certificate to substantiate that the incidence of duty has not been passed on...

Rebate claim – refund claim was time barred - rebate claim was rightly rejected as time barred but the re-credit of duty paid in Cenvat account is not admissible - CGOVT

Refund claim rejected as time bared - the amount deposited by the appellant during the investigation can never be construed as a duty - it is held as deposited under...

Quick Updates: