The CESTAT held that the revenue authorities cannot adopt an ...

Revenue authorities bound by earlier orders on identical facts; refund claim to be re-adjudicated considering precedents.

October 24, 2024

Case Laws Service Tax AT

The CESTAT held that the revenue authorities cannot adopt an inconsistent stand in subsequent proceedings when the facts are identical, unless there is a change in law. The authorities failed to base their decision of rejecting the refund claim on any change in law or circumstance, and ignored the appellant's submission regarding earlier orders granting refunds for the same service. The Tribunal remanded the matter back to the Adjudicating Authority for de novo adjudication, considering the earlier orders granting refunds, the appellant's submissions, and the laws applicable at the relevant time, after providing a proper opportunity of hearing to the appellant.

View Source

← Previous Next →

The CESTAT held that the revenue authorities cannot adopt an ...

Revenue authorities bound by earlier orders on identical facts; refund claim to be re-adjudicated considering precedents.

October 24, 2024

Case Laws Service Tax AT

You may also like:

Gross violation of CBEC instructions and the precedential value of CESTAT decisions. The Revenue filed an appeal before the first Appellate Authority without specifying...

The High Court quashed the order rejecting the refund claim of the petitioner, an SEZ Unit, on the ground that the petitioner was not allowed to claim a refund under the...

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...

The High Court held that the revisional authority's order placing the refund sanction order in abeyance u/s 108 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 was...

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 claim - Once an application of refund has been filed before the refund sanctioning authority, the said authority is duty bound to decide the refund application...

HC directed state authorities to process petitioner's GST refund claim promptly following inaction on previous requests. The authorities must verify facts, assess...

The appellants claimed that the entire amount of service tax paid by them should be considered as a deposit u/s 35FF of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and sought a refund....

Refund of excess tax paid - The refund claim under 11B was rejected by the Original Authority on the ground that the claim cannot be modified by the appellant to include...

Disbursal of refund amount - action of withholding of the petitioner/assessee’s claim of refund in question by the respondent CGST authority and not refunding the same...

The HC allowed the petition, quashing the impugned order and directing respondents to process the petitioner's refund claims for unutilized Input Tax Credit under...

HC directed state authorities to process petitioner's GST refund claim promptly following verification of facts and entitlement. Decision must consider state...

The HC disposed of the petition directing State Authorities to immediately process the petitioner's GST refund claim after verification of facts and entitlement. The...

The Adjudicating Authority had the power to recall its earlier order, which contained factual mistakes, and pass a corrected order regarding the return of the Corporate...

Quick Updates: