Patent-settlement expenditure treated as commercially expedient revenue outlay, with foreign-law restrictions inapplicable before the prospective amen...
International transaction benchmarking restricts transfer pricing adjustments to associated-enterprise dealings, while functional comparability govern...
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 
