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 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 4816 
Join Channel 
