Form 26AS evidence requires successor-entity accounting verification after business transfer, while invoice-supported related-party advertising expend...
Money-laundering judgment timing requires awaiting the scheduled-offence decision despite continuation of the underlying trial where outcomes directly...
Accredited investor eligibility expands through securities-market exposure, while alternative investment fund disputes require prescribed resolution a...
Page of 4916
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
41 to 60 of 98302 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The case involved a refund claim for duty paid under protest, rejected on the ground of unjust enrichment. The appellant paid duty under protest and filed a refund claim for excess duty paid. The Tribunal held that the appellant passed the bar of unjust enrichment by providing a certificate from a Chartered Accountant and showing the refund amount in the Balance sheet. The appellant was entitled to the refund as per the decision in a previous case with similar facts. The appellant was also granted interest u/s 27A of the Customs Act, 1962 from three months after filing the refund claim. The Tribunal set aside the order and allowed the appeal.
The case involved a refund claim for duty paid under protest, rejected on the ground of unjust enrichment. The appellant paid duty under protest and filed a refund claim for excess duty paid. The Tribunal held that the appellant passed the bar of unjust enrichment by providing a certificate from a Chartered Accountant and showing the refund amount in the Balance sheet. The appellant was entitled to the refund as per the decision in a previous case with similar facts. The appellant was also granted interest u/s 27A of the Customs Act, 1962 from three months after filing the refund claim. The Tribunal set aside the order and allowed the appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.