Refund claim u/s 142(3) of CGST Act, 2017 read with Section 11B ...

Partial GST refund allowed; remaining claim remanded for fresh adjudication on unjust enrichment.

Case Laws Central Excise

November 6, 2024

Refund claim u/s 142(3) of CGST Act, 2017 read with Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1994 was partially allowed. Refund of Rs. 20,52,143/- and Rs. 2,19,004/- granted, appellant can approach GST authority for credit in electronic ledger. Refund of Rs. 41,244/- and Rs. 4,87,533/- initially rejected as paid after 01.07.2007, when no CENVAT credit provision existed. However, CESTAT relied on its previous decision in Shree Ganesh Remedies case, holding that Section 142(3) covers amounts accrued pre-GST regime, even if paid post 01.07.2017. Matter remanded to adjudicating authority to pass fresh order considering unjust enrichment, after processing refund claim for Rs. 41,244/- and Rs. 4,87,533/-.

View Source

← Previous Next →

Refund claim u/s 142(3) of CGST Act, 2017 read with Section 11B ...

Partial GST refund allowed; remaining claim remanded for fresh adjudication on unjust enrichment.

Case Laws Central Excise

November 6, 2024

You may also like:

Refund claims – unjust enrichment – service tax paid under protest – refund allowed - AT

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

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...

Appellant filed refund claim which was initially rejected by original authority on grounds of ineligibility for exemption notification. Commissioner (Appeals) remanded...

The appellant filed bills of entry claiming exemption under Notification No. 46/2011-Cus, which was denied during re-assessment. The Commissioner (Appeals) rectified...

Show cause notice demanding interest was confirmed by the original Adjudicating Authority and settled under SVLDRS Scheme, thus refund of the confirmed amount does not...

Refund claim - Bar of limitation - Respondent filed refund claim consequential to the dropping of demand under adjudication order dated 27/11/2009 within 3 months -...

Circular clarifies that insurance companies are not liable to pay GST on salvage/wreck value deducted from claim settlement amount, as salvage remains property of...

Refund claim - unjust enrichment - Merely because it was shown as expenditure, the department cannot contend that pre-deposit made by appellant is hit by unjust...

Denial of refund claim - Unjust enrichment - Duty paid twice - e appellants are entitled for refund claim for duty paid on Ethanol - unjust enrichment is not applicable - AT

Refund claim - unjust enrichment - Appellant has claimed the deduction of the amount claimed as refund by them as expense in his profit and loss account, i.e. as a...

CESTAT ALLAHABAD held that refund claim for service tax under section 65 of Finance Act, 1994 was not time-barred as the relevant date for refund claim was the date of...

Refund of service tax paid - unjust enrichment - Tribunal on merit of claim held that no service tax is payable - the adjudicating authority did sanction the refund but...

Refund - unjust enrichment - excise duty has not been claimed from the buyer of the goods and the same has been reflected in “Excise Duty Refund Receivable Account” -...

Scope of the order pursuant to remand back of the matter - Refund of Excess Duty paid - The Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has travelled beyond the remand order passed by...

Quick Updates: