Fraudulently obtained SEIS scrips cannot support customs exemption; recovery, confiscation and penalties were sustained, but employee penalty fell awa...
Page of 4813
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
5081 to 5100 of 96257 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Refund could not be denied merely because the Chartered Accountant's certificate was not in the prescribed format or did not mention the year, where the lower authority did not question the genuineness of the claim and the defect was only formal. The Tribunal held that the Board circular format was only indicative, not mandatory, and that substantial compliance was sufficient. The rejection of refund on this technical ground was therefore unsustainable. The common appellate order was set aside and the appeals were allowed with consequential benefits as per law.
Refund could not be denied merely because the Chartered Accountant's certificate was not in the prescribed format or did not mention the year, where the lower authority did not question the genuineness of the claim and the defect was only formal. The Tribunal held that the Board circular format was only indicative, not mandatory, and that substantial compliance was sufficient. The rejection of refund on this technical ground was therefore unsustainable. The common appellate order was set aside and the appeals were allowed with consequential benefits as per law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.