Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
CESTAT ALLAHABAD held that refund of Special Additional Duty (SAD) on goods sold with VAT charged is permissible u/s Notification No.102 of 2007 Cus. The tribunal found that refund claims met notification and circular requirements, including certification by a chartered accountant to avoid unjust enrichment. Adjudicating authority followed board guidelines in sanctioning refunds. Previous tribunal decisions favored respondents, dismissing revenue appeals. Distinction made from a Supreme Court case not applicable to SAD refund cases.
CESTAT ALLAHABAD held that refund of Special Additional Duty (SAD) on goods sold with VAT charged is permissible u/s Notification No.102 of 2007 Cus. The tribunal found that refund claims met notification and circular requirements, including certification by a chartered accountant to avoid unjust enrichment. Adjudicating authority followed board guidelines in sanctioning refunds. Previous tribunal decisions favored respondents, dismissing revenue appeals. Distinction made from a Supreme Court case not applicable to SAD refund cases.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4788
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
