Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
CESTAT held that fabrication of transmission towers did not constitute manufacture, making excise duty collection illegal under Article 265. The tribunal rejected the department's time limitation argument u/s 11B of Central Excise Act, ruling that time limits do not apply when tax was not payable. The endorsement "under protest" on gate passes was deemed sufficient despite non-compliance with Rule 233B formalities. The appellant was granted refund with 12% interest per annum from the date of initial refund rejection, as retention of revenue deposit was held unconstitutional. The tribunal emphasized that procedural technicalities cannot override substantive rights when tax is collected without legal authority.
CESTAT held that fabrication of transmission towers did not constitute manufacture, making excise duty collection illegal under Article 265. The tribunal rejected the department's time limitation argument u/s 11B of Central Excise Act, ruling that time limits do not apply when tax was not payable. The endorsement "under protest" on gate passes was deemed sufficient despite non-compliance with Rule 233B formalities. The appellant was granted refund with 12% interest per annum from the date of initial refund rejection, as retention of revenue deposit was held unconstitutional. The tribunal emphasized that procedural technicalities cannot override substantive rights when tax is collected without legal authority.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
