Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
Defined public benefit can retain charitable character; registration renewal requires examining genuine activities and legal compliance, not surplus a...
Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
Page of 4784
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
821 to 840 of 95673 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Refund on finalisation of provisional customs assessment was held not to be barred by unjust enrichment. The Court accepted the Tribunal's finding that the differential duty was paid much later and therefore could not have been passed on to customers. It treated the law as settled by the later Supreme Court decision in Hindustan Zinc Ltd., which held that unjust enrichment does not apply to provisional assessment even after finalisation. On that basis, the refund of excess duty arising from reassessment of the provisionally assessed imports was allowed, and the Revenue's appeal was dismissed.
Refund on finalisation of provisional customs assessment was held not to be barred by unjust enrichment. The Court accepted the Tribunal's finding that the differential duty was paid much later and therefore could not have been passed on to customers. It treated the law as settled by the later Supreme Court decision in Hindustan Zinc Ltd., which held that unjust enrichment does not apply to provisional assessment even after finalisation. On that basis, the refund of excess duty arising from reassessment of the provisionally assessed imports was allowed, and the Revenue's appeal was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.