Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
Principles of unjust enrichment - Refund amount ordered to be credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund instead of being paid to the appellant - The Tribunal interprets Clause (e) of the third proviso to section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and concludes that the appellant had indeed borne the burden of the duty and had not passed it on to any other party. - Based on the findings, the Tribunal determines that the appellant is entitled to the refund amount along with interest, which should be reimbursed directly to the appellant instead of being credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund.
Principles of unjust enrichment - Refund amount ordered to be credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund instead of being paid to the appellant - The Tribunal interprets Clause (e) of the third proviso to section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and concludes that the appellant had indeed borne the burden of the duty and had not passed it on to any other party. - Based on the findings, the Tribunal determines that the appellant is entitled to the refund amount along with interest, which should be reimbursed directly to the appellant instead of being credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.