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 CESTAT held that for refunds filed under the Central Excise Act, 1944, interest on delayed refunds is governed by Section 11BB and would be payable from the date of deposit made by the assessee, as per the Supreme Court's decision in Ranbaxy case. The appeal filed by the assessee against the adjudicating authority's order, which had calculated interest from the deposit date, was dismissed.
The CESTAT held that for refunds filed under the Central Excise Act, 1944, interest on delayed refunds is governed by Section 11BB and would be payable from the date of deposit made by the assessee, as per the Supreme Court's decision in Ranbaxy case. The appeal filed by the assessee against the adjudicating authority's order, which had calculated interest from the deposit date, was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.