Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
The appellant is entitled to interest on the sanctioned refund from the date after three months from the date of application till the date of sanction of refund. The Commissioner (Appeals) erred in denying interest based on the explanation appended to Section 27A, which is not applicable as the refund sanction order was passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Customs. As per Section 27A, the appellant is eligible for interest after three months from the date of refund application, not from the date of the refund order, in line with the Supreme Court's ruling in Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. vs Union of India. The CESTAT set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal.
The appellant is entitled to interest on the sanctioned refund from the date after three months from the date of application till the date of sanction of refund. The Commissioner (Appeals) erred in denying interest based on the explanation appended to Section 27A, which is not applicable as the refund sanction order was passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Customs. As per Section 27A, the appellant is eligible for interest after three months from the date of refund application, not from the date of the refund order, in line with the Supreme Court's ruling in Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. vs Union of India. The CESTAT set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
