Commercial vehicle depreciation, scientifically determined warranty provisions and exempt-income disallowances were resolved in favour of the taxpayer...
Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Remission of Central Excise Duty - The tribunal found Rule 21 inapplicable, as it pertains to goods lost or destroyed before clearance from the factory, not to loss of production capacity. - It was held that the appellant could not claim abatement for non-production under Rule 8, as the factory's closure did not meet the minimum period stipulated for such abatement. - The tribunal dismissed the argument of unjust enrichment by referencing the Supreme Court's stance that refund claims based on taxes paid under an unconstitutional law are not unconditional and highlighted that the concept of unjust enrichment does not apply straightforwardly to the state in cases of tax collection and refund.
Remission of Central Excise Duty - The tribunal found Rule 21 inapplicable, as it pertains to goods lost or destroyed before clearance from the factory, not to loss of production capacity. - It was held that the appellant could not claim abatement for non-production under Rule 8, as the factory's closure did not meet the minimum period stipulated for such abatement. - The tribunal dismissed the argument of unjust enrichment by referencing the Supreme Court's stance that refund claims based on taxes paid under an unconstitutional law are not unconditional and highlighted that the concept of unjust enrichment does not apply straightforwardly to the state in cases of tax collection and refund.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
