Raja Abhishek For NIRC 2024
about 1 month ago
ššš¦š§šš§ š„šš¹š¶š»š“ š¼š» š„š²š³šš»š± š¼š³ š¦š²šæšš¶š°š² š§š®š š¢ The bench of CESTAT observed:
The Tribunal upheld the rejection of a fresh refund claim for service tax because the appellant did not appeal the initial rejection, making it final.
š šš®š°šš: šš¼šŗš½š®š»š: M/s Vedanta Aluminium Limited ššššš²: Whether the rejection of the refund is proper.
āļø ššš±š“šŗš²š»š: The initial refund rejection for 01.03.2009 and 02.03.2009 was not appealed, making it final. The appellant's admission of payments made after 03.03.2009 confirmed the services were not under the previous notification, justifying the fresh claim's rejection.
šš®šš² šš»š³š¼: š£š®šæšš¶š²š: M/s Vedanta Aluminium Limited Vs Commissioner of (Appeals), Central Excise Customs & Service Tax š¢šæš±š²šæ šš®šš²: 05 June 2024
š The ruling confirms the appellant's fresh refund claim was rightly rejected due to the finality of the initial order and the timing of payments. #CESTAT #ServiceTax #LegalUpdate
Page created with TweetHunter
Write your own