Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Customs relief for Strait of Hormuz maritime disruptions remains available, with existing conditions continuing unchanged through the extended validit...
Refund claims involving tax paid under a mistaken understanding of service-tax liability turn on unjust enrichment and the character of the payment. Where the amount collected from a buyer is reversed through credit notes, supported by fund transfers and confirmations from the buyer and Chartered Accountant, the presumption that the tax burden was passed on may be rebutted, permitting refund. Amounts paid under a mistake of law may remain deposits rather than duty; consequential interest may likewise lack the character of duty. On that basis, limitation and the refund mechanism under Section 11B may not apply to such payments, while unjust enrichment does not bar refund after the incidence has been returned to the buyer.
Refund claims involving tax paid under a mistaken understanding of service-tax liability turn on unjust enrichment and the character of the payment. Where the amount collected from a buyer is reversed through credit notes, supported by fund transfers and confirmations from the buyer and Chartered Accountant, the presumption that the tax burden was passed on may be rebutted, permitting refund. Amounts paid under a mistake of law may remain deposits rather than duty; consequential interest may likewise lack the character of duty. On that basis, limitation and the refund mechanism under Section 11B may not apply to such payments, while unjust enrichment does not bar refund after the incidence has been returned to the buyer.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.