Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
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 4784
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
