Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
The period of limitation of one year does not apply when the amount claimed as refund has been paid under protest. Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962, only recognizes the fact of payment of amounts under protest and does not recognize the vacation of such protest once it is established that the amount claimed as refund was paid under protest. The provisions of Section 27 cannot be applied to refund claims for penalty and fines, as these amounts were paid under protest as per the department's direction for effecting the clearance of goods, though the order imposing the fine and penalty was challenged in appeal. Therefore, the refund claim cannot be held barred by the limitation provided in Section 27, and the impugned order rejecting the refund claim lacks merit, leading to the allowance of the appeal.
The period of limitation of one year does not apply when the amount claimed as refund has been paid under protest. Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962, only recognizes the fact of payment of amounts under protest and does not recognize the vacation of such protest once it is established that the amount claimed as refund was paid under protest. The provisions of Section 27 cannot be applied to refund claims for penalty and fines, as these amounts were paid under protest as per the department's direction for effecting the clearance of goods, though the order imposing the fine and penalty was challenged in appeal. Therefore, the refund claim cannot be held barred by the limitation provided in Section 27, and the impugned order rejecting the refund claim lacks merit, leading to the allowance of the appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
