Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Limitation in oppression and mismanagement proceedings: prior knowledge of removal and dilution barred the challenge, with valuation directions upheld...
Insolvency professional agency governance rules amended to add nominee directors, tighten independent director eligibility, and regulate managing dire...
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 
TaxTMI 
of 4814 
Join Channel 
