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 ...
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 4801
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
