Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
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...
Interest on delayed customs-duty refunds is payable where reassessment and refund claims remained pending, with the grant linked to principles of natural justice. Refunds of differential duty deposited during investigation may attract interest at 12 per cent per annum when jurisdictional High Court precedent, following the Sandvik Asia principle, applies. The applicable interest period remains limited to the period already allowed where it was not challenged by the Revenue; the claimant cannot seek to enlarge that period. Interest was accordingly enhanced from 6 per cent to 12 per cent for the unchanged three-month period commencing 30 January 2009 until refund, and the Revenue challenge was rejected.
Interest on delayed customs-duty refunds is payable where reassessment and refund claims remained pending, with the grant linked to principles of natural justice. Refunds of differential duty deposited during investigation may attract interest at 12 per cent per annum when jurisdictional High Court precedent, following the Sandvik Asia principle, applies. The applicable interest period remains limited to the period already allowed where it was not challenged by the Revenue; the claimant cannot seek to enlarge that period. Interest was accordingly enhanced from 6 per cent to 12 per cent for the unchanged three-month period commencing 30 January 2009 until refund, and the Revenue challenge was rejected.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4786
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
