Faceless reassessment jurisdiction turned on retrospective AO definition, with later faceless-assessment changes treated as clarificatory and procedur...
Mechanical approval under search assessment law vitiates assessments when sanction lacks application of mind; retrospective curative provision cannot ...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
2121 to 2140 of 96092 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The High Court held that the rejection of refund claim for Extra Duty Deposit (EDD) paid by the petitioner was unjustified. The EDD amount collected during Special Valuation Branch (SVB) proceedings was not a customs duty u/s 12 of the Customs Act, 1962. It was a deposit eligible for appropriation towards duty liability after final assessment. The amount over the payable duty should be refunded after Bill of Entry assessment, subject to no unjust enrichment u/s 27. The impugned order was set aside, and respondents were directed to complete proceedings within six months. The petition was allowed.
The High Court held that the rejection of refund claim for Extra Duty Deposit (EDD) paid by the petitioner was unjustified. The EDD amount collected during Special Valuation Branch (SVB) proceedings was not a customs duty u/s 12 of the Customs Act, 1962. It was a deposit eligible for appropriation towards duty liability after final assessment. The amount over the payable duty should be refunded after Bill of Entry assessment, subject to no unjust enrichment u/s 27. The impugned order was set aside, and respondents were directed to complete proceedings within six months. The petition was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
