Faceless reassessment jurisdiction turned on retrospective AO definition, with later faceless-assessment changes treated as clarificatory and procedur...
Page of 4807
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
2161 to 2180 of 96140 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
CESTAT ALLAHABAD held that refund claim of Special Additional Duty (SAD) was justified as unjust enrichment was not established. The importer provided invoices, VAT Challan, and CA Certificate to support the claim. Original and Appellate Authorities both found no fault in the claim. The principle of not challenging factual findings unless proven perverse was emphasized. Citing a Supreme Court case, the appeal by the revenue was dismissed.
CESTAT ALLAHABAD held that refund claim of Special Additional Duty (SAD) was justified as unjust enrichment was not established. The importer provided invoices, VAT Challan, and CA Certificate to support the claim. Original and Appellate Authorities both found no fault in the claim. The principle of not challenging factual findings unless proven perverse was emphasized. Citing a Supreme Court case, the appeal by the revenue was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4807 
Join Channel 
