Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
The appellant imported goods and claimed exemption from countervailing duty (CVD) under Notification No. 30/2004-CE, as the like articles manufactured in India were exempt from excise duty. The appellant paid CVD under protest and filed a protest letter. The Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the appellant's appeal, granting exemption from CVD. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's order, rejecting the revenue's objection based on unjust enrichment. The Tribunal relied on its earlier decision allowing the appellant's appeal on the same issue. Consequently, the impugned order denying refund was set aside, granting consequential relief to the appellant.
The appellant imported goods and claimed exemption from countervailing duty (CVD) under Notification No. 30/2004-CE, as the like articles manufactured in India were exempt from excise duty. The appellant paid CVD under protest and filed a protest letter. The Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the appellant's appeal, granting exemption from CVD. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's order, rejecting the revenue's objection based on unjust enrichment. The Tribunal relied on its earlier decision allowing the appellant's appeal on the same issue. Consequently, the impugned order denying refund was set aside, granting consequential relief to the appellant.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4780
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
