Trademark depreciation and section 14A adjustments: ITAT applies consistency, independent book-profit computation, and no disallowance without exempt ...
Rebuttable search presumptions and corroboration standards shaped deletion of unsubstantiated additions, while rental income and limited profit estima...
The High Court considered a case involving the refund of excise duty paid by a company and the principles of unjust enrichment. The issue was whether the company successfully proved that the duty incidence was not passed on to the buyer. Despite the company's arguments, the court found that the duty had indeed been recovered from the customer. The court rejected the reliance on a certificate issued by a Chartered Accountant, stating it contradicted the invoices. The court upheld the decision to credit the refund amount to the consumer welfare fund to prevent unjust enrichment. The court referenced a similar case where a certificate from a Chartered Accountant was disbelieved. Ultimately, the appeal was dismissed.
The High Court considered a case involving the refund of excise duty paid by a company and the principles of unjust enrichment. The issue was whether the company successfully proved that the duty incidence was not passed on to the buyer. Despite the company's arguments, the court found that the duty had indeed been recovered from the customer. The court rejected the reliance on a certificate issued by a Chartered Accountant, stating it contradicted the invoices. The court upheld the decision to credit the refund amount to the consumer welfare fund to prevent unjust enrichment. The court referenced a similar case where a certificate from a Chartered Accountant was disbelieved. Ultimately, the appeal was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
