TLC Legal is a sophisticated indirect tax-focused boutique that brings together lawyers, tax consultants and chartered accountants. Many on the legal side have additional accounting qualifications. The firm specialises in advisory and litigation relating to indirect tax, covering goods and services tax, customs, central excise, service tax, VAT, foreign trade policy, the Foreign Exchange Management Act and the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. The firm has offices in Delhi, Mumbai, Ahmedabad, Chennai and Bengaluru.
The main contacts at the firm are all indirect tax specialists: managing partner Vipin Jain, and senior partners Vishal Agrawal and Aqeel Sheerazi.
In a first-of-its-kind tax case, the team represented Reliance SEZ before all quasi-judicial authorities and the Service Tax Tribunal (STT) in a case for a refund claim. The issue before the STT was whether a Unit in the SEZ (SEZ Unit) was governed by the time limitation of one year for claiming refund of taxes paid on input services received by it when the claim filed by it was on the strength of an internal invoice issued belatedly by the head office located in the Domestic Tariff Area. The matter was a first inasmuch as it departed from the law laid down in a catena of judgments, which has consistently held that the time limit of one year was applicable to an SEZ Unit, and delays, if any, were to be condoned on a case-to-case basis. In this particular matter, the STT held that the time limit of one year was not at all applicable to SEZ Units, when seeking refund of tax credits availed on the strength of ISD Invoices. The Tribunal’s findings in this regard were founded on a strict interpretation of the provisions and an appreciation of the overall scheme of the applicable rules.
The team successfully assisted appellant Larsen & Toubro in its challenge to the customs authorities relating to import duties. In another highlight, the firm acted for Jio in a matter before the Tax Appellate Tribunal. The matter is unique as it is the first time a decisive law has been laid on the aspect of a portion of the Cenvat Credit Rules, which warrant that reversal of taxes paid on inputs and input services cannot come in to play in situations where a certain quantum of inputs and input services are in any case required in the manufacturing process and the emergence of by-product cannot be averted by using a lesser quantity of inputs and input services.
