{"id":240323,"date":"2020-12-08T15:00:32","date_gmt":"2020-12-08T09:30:32","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=240323"},"modified":"2020-12-08T13:30:37","modified_gmt":"2020-12-08T08:00:37","slug":"cestat-refund-claim-was-to-be-given-directly-to-the-service-recipient-tribunal-allows-appeal-holding-that-the-refund-claim-was-not-hit-by-barred-of-unjust-enrichment","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/12\/08\/cestat-refund-claim-was-to-be-given-directly-to-the-service-recipient-tribunal-allows-appeal-holding-that-the-refund-claim-was-not-hit-by-barred-of-unjust-enrichment\/","title":{"rendered":"CESTAT | Refund claim was to be given directly to the service recipient; Tribunal allows appeal holding that the refund claim was not hit by barred of unjust enrichment"},"content":{"rendered":"

Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT):<\/strong> Ashok Jindal (Judicial Member) allowed an appeal against the order of dismissal by the Commissioner (Appeals).<\/p>\n

The appellant was engaged in providing works contract service to Garrison Engineers (MES) a unit of Department in the Ministry of Defense who was not engaged in any commercial activity. The said service was exempted from service tax before 01-04-2015 vide entry No. 12(a) of Mega Exemption Notification No. 25\/2012-ST which was withdrawn and the above mentioning construction services became taxable with effect from 01-04-2015 subsequently by another notification the said entry was again inserted thereby exempting the service tax providing in relation to construction of noncommercial Govt. building from whole of service tax retrospectively. In view of which the appellant had filed a refund claim for the service tax paid.<\/p>\n

Initially an amount of Rs 3,50,746\/- for the period March, 2015 was rejected as time-barred and the refund claim of Rs 32,70,626\/- was sanctioned but was credited to Consumer Welfare Fund being hit by unjust and enrichment. The said order was challenged before the Commissioner (Appeal) by the appellant who had allowed the refund claim of Rs 32,70,626\/- to the appellant holding that the said amount be given back to the appellant who would in turn refund the same to the military, amount of Rs 3,50,746\/-was rejected as time-barred. The revenue had filed an appeal before the Tribunal against the order of sanctioning refund claim which was dismissed and against the order of holding the refund of Rs 3,50,746\/- as time barred an appeal had been filed by the appellant which was allowed holding that refund claim cannot be held time-barred and the appellant was entitled to claim of the amount paid for the period March, 2015.<\/p>\n

Thereafter, the appellant made a request to the Assistant Commissioner to refund the amount, the adjudicating authority instead of complying the direction of Commissioner (Appeals) as well as the Tribunal transferred the whole of the amount of Rs. 36,21,376\/- to the Consumer Welfare Fund holding that the same was hit by the principle of unjust enrichment. An appeal against the said order was filed before the Commissioner (Appeals) was also dismissed. Hence, the instant appeal.<\/p>\n

The Tribunal explained that the said issue had been dealt in the judgment of A.P. Enterprises v. C.C.E & S.T. Panchkula,<\/em> and it was to be decided whether the refund claim was hit by barred of unjust enrichment or not,<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 \u201cOn going through the said letter, I find that in terms of Section 11B (2) (e), the person who has borne the tax, can file the refund claim. Therefore, the service tax in the impugned matter paid by the appellant is required to be refunded to the service recipient directly. In these circumstances, I hold that the refund of service tax paid by the appellant cannot be rejected. Therefore, I sanctioned the refund claim, but the same is payable in the account of service recipient directly. Therefore, the appellant is directed to provide all the details of the service recipient required for sanctioning the refund claim. If already provided by the appellant, the adjudicating authority shall sanction the refund claim to the service recipient directly within 30 days from the receipt of this order.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

The Tribunal while allowing the appeal relied on the case of the Supreme Court in Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. Union of India<\/em>, (2011) 10 SCC 292<\/a> and held that the refund claim was to be given directly to the service recipient i.e Garrison Engineers (MES), therefore, the refund claim was allowed along with interest.[Verma Brothers v. C.C.E. & ST, Service Tax Appeal No. 60358 of 2020, decided on 01-12-2020]<\/p>\n

\n

Suchita Shukla, Editorial Assistant has put this story together<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT): Ashok Jindal (Judicial Member) allowed an appeal against the order of dismissal by the <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":201689,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,11],"tags":[29785,38488,35203,2621],"class_list":["post-240323","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-tribunals_commissions_regulatorybodies","tag-law","tag-refund-claim","tag-service-recipient","tag-Tax"],"yoast_head":"\nCESTAT | Refund claim was to be given directly to the service recipient; Tribunal allows appeal holding that the refund claim was not hit by barred of unjust enrichment | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/12\/08\/cestat-refund-claim-was-to-be-given-directly-to-the-service-recipient-tribunal-allows-appeal-holding-that-the-refund-claim-was-not-hit-by-barred-of-unjust-enrichment\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"CESTAT | Refund claim was to be given directly to the service recipient; Tribunal allows appeal holding that the refund claim was not hit by barred of unjust enrichment\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT): Ashok Jindal (Judicial Member) allowed an appeal against the order of dismissal by the\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/12\/08\/cestat-refund-claim-was-to-be-given-directly-to-the-service-recipient-tribunal-allows-appeal-holding-that-the-refund-claim-was-not-hit-by-barred-of-unjust-enrichment\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2020-12-08T09:30:32+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/12\/08\/cestat-refund-claim-was-to-be-given-directly-to-the-service-recipient-tribunal-allows-appeal-holding-that-the-refund-claim-was-not-hit-by-barred-of-unjust-enrichment\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/12\/08\/cestat-refund-claim-was-to-be-given-directly-to-the-service-recipient-tribunal-allows-appeal-holding-that-the-refund-claim-was-not-hit-by-barred-of-unjust-enrichment\/\",\"name\":\"CESTAT | Refund claim was to be given directly to the service recipient; Tribunal allows appeal holding that the refund claim was not hit by barred of unjust enrichment | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/12\/08\/cestat-refund-claim-was-to-be-given-directly-to-the-service-recipient-tribunal-allows-appeal-holding-that-the-refund-claim-was-not-hit-by-barred-of-unjust-enrichment\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/12\/08\/cestat-refund-claim-was-to-be-given-directly-to-the-service-recipient-tribunal-allows-appeal-holding-that-the-refund-claim-was-not-hit-by-barred-of-unjust-enrichment\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2020-12-08T09:30:32+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/12\/08\/cestat-refund-claim-was-to-be-given-directly-to-the-service-recipient-tribunal-allows-appeal-holding-that-the-refund-claim-was-not-hit-by-barred-of-unjust-enrichment\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/12\/08\/cestat-refund-claim-was-to-be-given-directly-to-the-service-recipient-tribunal-allows-appeal-holding-that-the-refund-claim-was-not-hit-by-barred-of-unjust-enrichment\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/12\/08\/cestat-refund-claim-was-to-be-given-directly-to-the-service-recipient-tribunal-allows-appeal-holding-that-the-refund-claim-was-not-hit-by-barred-of-unjust-enrichment\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg\",\"width\":1330,\"height\":887},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/12\/08\/cestat-refund-claim-was-to-be-given-directly-to-the-service-recipient-tribunal-allows-appeal-holding-that-the-refund-claim-was-not-hit-by-barred-of-unjust-enrichment\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"CESTAT | Refund claim was to be given directly to the service recipient; Tribunal allows appeal holding that the refund claim was not hit by barred of unjust enrichment\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"CESTAT | Refund claim was to be given directly to the service recipient; Tribunal allows appeal holding that the refund claim was not hit by barred of unjust enrichment | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/12\/08\/cestat-refund-claim-was-to-be-given-directly-to-the-service-recipient-tribunal-allows-appeal-holding-that-the-refund-claim-was-not-hit-by-barred-of-unjust-enrichment\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"CESTAT | Refund claim was to be given directly to the service recipient; Tribunal allows appeal holding that the refund claim was not hit by barred of unjust enrichment","og_description":"Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT): Ashok Jindal (Judicial Member) allowed an appeal against the order of dismissal by the","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/12\/08\/cestat-refund-claim-was-to-be-given-directly-to-the-service-recipient-tribunal-allows-appeal-holding-that-the-refund-claim-was-not-hit-by-barred-of-unjust-enrichment\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2020-12-08T09:30:32+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/12\/08\/cestat-refund-claim-was-to-be-given-directly-to-the-service-recipient-tribunal-allows-appeal-holding-that-the-refund-claim-was-not-hit-by-barred-of-unjust-enrichment\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/12\/08\/cestat-refund-claim-was-to-be-given-directly-to-the-service-recipient-tribunal-allows-appeal-holding-that-the-refund-claim-was-not-hit-by-barred-of-unjust-enrichment\/","name":"CESTAT | Refund claim was to be given directly to the service recipient; Tribunal allows appeal holding that the refund claim was not hit by barred of unjust enrichment | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/12\/08\/cestat-refund-claim-was-to-be-given-directly-to-the-service-recipient-tribunal-allows-appeal-holding-that-the-refund-claim-was-not-hit-by-barred-of-unjust-enrichment\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/12\/08\/cestat-refund-claim-was-to-be-given-directly-to-the-service-recipient-tribunal-allows-appeal-holding-that-the-refund-claim-was-not-hit-by-barred-of-unjust-enrichment\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg","datePublished":"2020-12-08T09:30:32+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/12\/08\/cestat-refund-claim-was-to-be-given-directly-to-the-service-recipient-tribunal-allows-appeal-holding-that-the-refund-claim-was-not-hit-by-barred-of-unjust-enrichment\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/12\/08\/cestat-refund-claim-was-to-be-given-directly-to-the-service-recipient-tribunal-allows-appeal-holding-that-the-refund-claim-was-not-hit-by-barred-of-unjust-enrichment\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/12\/08\/cestat-refund-claim-was-to-be-given-directly-to-the-service-recipient-tribunal-allows-appeal-holding-that-the-refund-claim-was-not-hit-by-barred-of-unjust-enrichment\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg","width":1330,"height":887},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/12\/08\/cestat-refund-claim-was-to-be-given-directly-to-the-service-recipient-tribunal-allows-appeal-holding-that-the-refund-claim-was-not-hit-by-barred-of-unjust-enrichment\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"CESTAT | Refund claim was to be given directly to the service recipient; Tribunal allows appeal holding that the refund claim was not hit by barred of unjust enrichment"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":246414,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/04\/02\/refund-claim\/","url_meta":{"origin":240323,"position":0},"title":"CESTAT | Non compliance with the procedure leads to dismissal of refund claim; Tribunal dismisses appeal","author":"Editor","date":"April 2, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT): Suvendu Kumar Pati (Judicial Member), dismissed an appeal which was filed with the rejection of refund claims of the Appellant, an 100% EOU, filed for the period between April 2013 and December 2014 amounting to Rs 13,53,058\/-, under Rule 6 A of\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":252472,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/10\/service-tax-2\/","url_meta":{"origin":240323,"position":1},"title":"CESTAT | Is Service Tax chargeable on the services rendered by the foreman in the chit fund business? Tribunal answers","author":"Editor","date":"August 10, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT): P. Dinesha (Judicial Member) allowed an appeal which was filed after being rejected by the Adjudicating Authority and First Appellate Authority in relation to refund claim in the chit fund business. The appellant engaged in the chit fund business and after the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":238781,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/11\/07\/cestat-100-export-oriented-unit-entitled-to-refund-claim-for-the-cenvat-credit-under-r-5-of-ccr-2004-tribunal-allows-appeal\/","url_meta":{"origin":240323,"position":2},"title":"CESTAT\u00a0 | 100% Export Oriented Unit entitled to refund claim for the Cenvat credit under R. 5 of CCR, 2004; Tribunal allows appeal","author":"Editor","date":"November 7, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT): The Coram of P.V. Subba Rao (Technical Member) and P. Dinesha (Judicial Member) allowed an appeal which was filed against the Order-in-Appeal. The appellant was a 100% Export Oriented Unit (EOU) engaged in providing network management and other services to their clients.\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":280868,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/01\/03\/refund-under-rule-5-refund-under-section-11b-within-ambit-section-bb-interest-payable-delay-sanctioning-refund-under-rule-5-legal-new-legal-research-updates-cestat-cenvat-credit-rules\/","url_meta":{"origin":240323,"position":3},"title":"\u2018Commissioner ought to have followed Supreme Court’s Ranbaxy Laboratories verdict\u2019; CESTAT grants interest on delayed sanction of Refund claim under Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules","author":"Editor","date":"January 3, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cWhen series of decisions of Constitutional Courts are available then the Principle of Judicial discipline cast a duty on me to follow those and nothing else\u201d, observed the Tribunal.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"CESTAT","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image99.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":273212,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/07\/whether-refund-can-be-claimed-on-the-service-tax-deposited-on-construction-of-individual-independent-residential-houses-cestat-answers\/","url_meta":{"origin":240323,"position":4},"title":"Whether refund can be claimed on the service tax deposited on ‘construction’ of individual\/ independent ‘residential’ houses? CESTAT answers","author":"Editor","date":"September 7, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 \u00a0 Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT): The coram of Dilip Gupta (President) and Subba Rao (Technical Member) allowed an appeal holding that appellant is entitled to claim refund of the service tax deposited by the appellant on construction of individual\/independent residential houses. The appeal was filed\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/CESTATNew-Logo.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/CESTATNew-Logo.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/CESTATNew-Logo.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/CESTATNew-Logo.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/CESTATNew-Logo.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":237739,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/20\/cestat-interest-on-delayed-refund-is-payable-under-s-11bb-of-central-excise-act-1944-tribunal-allows-appeal\/","url_meta":{"origin":240323,"position":5},"title":"CESTAT | Interest on delayed refund is payable under S. 11BB of Central Excise Act, 1944; Tribunal allows appeal","author":"Editor","date":"October 20, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT): S.S. Garg (Judicial Member) allowed appeals directed against the common impugned order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) whereby the Commissioner had rejected appeals of the appellant and upheld the order passed by the original authority. Both appeals were taken together since the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/240323","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=240323"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/240323\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/201689"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=240323"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=240323"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=240323"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}