Opportunity to respond to jurisdictional reports is mandatory before customs settlement duty enhancement; connected applications require consistent ad...
Specific customs headings for scaffolding components prevail over general classification, invalidating misclassification proceedings and enabling with...
Liquidator appointment under Section 34 requires consideration of creditor recommendations, valid professional authorisation, and preservation of vali...
Income-tax exemption for specified regulatory fees and government grants applies subject to non-commercial activity and continuing compliance conditio...
Digital accessibility audit and remediation deadlines extended, while all other disability-compliance obligations for regulated entities remain unchan...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
621 to 640 of 96047 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Recovery proceedings u/s 263 were challenged. The Tribunal directed inquiries regarding the correctness of the valuation report, but these directions were allegedly not followed in the assessment order passed on remand. The High Court held that recovery should await the disposal of the appeal, as the demand was based on an assessment order passed prior to the Tribunal's order. 20% of the amounts had already been recovered, and no further recovery would be carried out based on the impugned assessment until the appeal is disposed of. If the assessment is set aside, the assessee would be entitled to a refund along with interest, either as per statute or the interest paid in the cash credit account, whichever is higher. If the assessment is upheld, the assessee would be saved from interest on the amount recovered during the intervening period. There was no need to direct a refund of the 20% already recovered.
Recovery proceedings u/s 263 were challenged. The Tribunal directed inquiries regarding the correctness of the valuation report, but these directions were allegedly not followed in the assessment order passed on remand. The High Court held that recovery should await the disposal of the appeal, as the demand was based on an assessment order passed prior to the Tribunal's order. 20% of the amounts had already been recovered, and no further recovery would be carried out based on the impugned assessment until the appeal is disposed of. If the assessment is set aside, the assessee would be entitled to a refund along with interest, either as per statute or the interest paid in the cash credit account, whichever is higher. If the assessment is upheld, the assessee would be saved from interest on the amount recovered during the intervening period. There was no need to direct a refund of the 20% already recovered.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.