Only person who has borne the incidence of duties/ taxes, is entitled to claim refund
Court :
Madras High Court
Brief :
The Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of M/s. Chennai Petroleum Company Ltd. (CPCL) v. Commissioner of GST & Central Excise [C.M.A.Nos.4298, 4299 and 4301 of 2019 dated, October 28, 2020] rejected the refund of excise duty under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 ("Central Excise Act") on the basis of credit notes issued, and held that the facts could not indicate, that M/s. CPCL has borne the incidence of Excise Duty which in law, could not be charged from it and it is a settled legal position under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act that it is only the person who has borne the incidence of Excise Duty who is entitled to claim refund.
Citation :
C.M.A.Nos.4298, 4299 and 4301 of 2019 dated, October 28, 2020
You have reached your daily limit of 2 Free Judgements
Subscribe to CCI PRO for unlimited access
Why Upgrade to CCI PRO?
- No Ads
- WhatsApp Community
- Daily E-Newsletter
- Unlimited Judgements Access
- Profile Visitors
- Link Social Profiles
- Featured Job Posts
- Pro Badge
- Expert GST Guidance
- Unlimited Forum Replies
- Download Content in PDF
Already a PRO member? Login here for an ad-free experience. 07941056694
Judgement posted by
Bimal Jain
Service
FCA, FCS LLB with21 Yrs of Experience inTaxation Indirect and Direct: Education Qualification: B.Com (Hons) Chartered Accountants Company Secretary LLB Qualified SAP FI/CO Consultants Professional Membership: Chairmanof Indirect Tax Committee of PHD Chamber of Commerce Member of Indirec ... Read more
Trending Online Classes
-
DT & Audit (Exam Oriented Fastrack Batch) - For May 26 Exams and onwards Full English
CA Bhanwar Borana & CA Shubham Keswani
CAclubindia
