Appellant's refund claim for differential duty under ...

Refund Claim Denied for Lack of Evidence; Appeal Dismissed for Introducing Irrelevant New Evidence Without Application.

September 28, 2024

Case Laws Customs AT

Appellant's refund claim for differential duty under Notification No. 30/2004-CE was rejected due to failure to produce relevant documents like balance sheets, profit and loss accounts, invoices, and cost data to rule out unjust enrichment. Appellant attempted to introduce new evidence before the Tribunal, which is generally not permitted u/r 23 of the Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1982, unless permitted through a separate application. The new evidence submitted was found irrelevant to the facts of the case. The lower authority's view rejecting the refund claim was reasonable, legal, and proper. The appeal was rejected as the lacunae pointed out by the Original Authority and Commissioner (Appeals) remained unaddressed.

View Source

← Previous Next →

Appellant's refund claim for differential duty under ...

Refund Claim Denied for Lack of Evidence; Appeal Dismissed for Introducing Irrelevant New Evidence Without Application.

September 28, 2024

Case Laws Customs AT

You may also like:

Refund - Lack of documentary evidence - appellants have not submitted the evidence of payment of service tax on the specified services for which the refunds were sought...

CESTAT allowed appeal concerning refund of CVD and ACD. Original authority's rejection was based on contradictory findings - accepting CA certificate showing non-passing...

Refund claim - rejected on the ground that the appellant cannot claim the refund directly without challenging the assessment order (bill of entry) - refund cannot be denied - AT

Refund of duty paid - filing of refund claim before the wrong jurisdiction - if the adjudicating authority was of the view that the appellant has not filed refund claim...

Refund of duty paid - filing of refund claim before the wrong jurisdiction - if the adjudicating authority was of the view that the appellant has not filed refund claim...

Refund of SAD - The appellant, a trader, imported goods and claimed a refund on the paid Special Additional Duty (SAD). However, the refund claims were rejected by the...

Refund of pre-deposit - refund claim filed by the CHA is proper or otherwise - It is not the case that whether CHA is claiming the refund. Those are applications of...

The appellant paid service tax voluntarily under reverse charge mechanism before the GST regime. The adjudicating authority denied refund, holding that service tax was...

Refund claim - The decision of ITC Limited is not applicable to the present facts and circumstances of the case as at the time of filing of Bills of Entry, the appellant...

Re-import of goods - Claim of exemption from customs duty - Whether the original export was under the claim of refund of IGST? - Appellant claimed that at the time of...

Refund of CENVAT Credit - alleged lack of nexus - The procedure for claiming such refund, enshrined in notification no. 27/2012-Central Excise Act, 1944 (NT) dated 18th...

The petitioner's denial of refund of input tax credit debited as a pre-deposit was challenged. The court held that the non-inclusion of freight and pumping charges...

Claim of Refund - Post GST, on demand, appellant paid service tax under reverse charge basis and claim refund as the same is eligible as Input Tax Credit under the...

Service tax refund claim filed beyond statutory limitation period cannot be entertained. Refund application must be filed within one year from relevant date as per...

The period of limitation of one year does not apply when the amount claimed as refund has been paid under protest. Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962, only recognizes...

Quick Updates: