PMLA anticipatory bail requires satisfaction of twin conditions, while predicate-offence protection does not extend to independent money-laundering pr...
School-affiliation charges remain taxable where not directly connected with examinations, while extended limitation requires proof of deliberate tax e...
CESTAT denied interest claim on pre-deposit refund made u/s 35F of Central Excise Act. Pre-deposit from 2012 was refunded in 2018 post-favorable appeal outcome. While appellant sought interest from deposit date, CESTAT held that u/s 35FF, interest is payable only after three months from appellate order communication. Despite appellant's reliance on Sandvik Asia precedent, CESTAT distinguished current case as specific statutory provisions now govern interest payment on pre-deposits. Since refund was processed within prescribed timeframe, no interest liability arose. Tribunal emphasized that post-2014 Finance Act amendments, pre-deposits are governed by provisions existing at time of deposit. Appeal dismissed with no interest awarded on refunded amount.
CESTAT denied interest claim on pre-deposit refund made u/s 35F of Central Excise Act. Pre-deposit from 2012 was refunded in 2018 post-favorable appeal outcome. While appellant sought interest from deposit date, CESTAT held that u/s 35FF, interest is payable only after three months from appellate order communication. Despite appellant's reliance on Sandvik Asia precedent, CESTAT distinguished current case as specific statutory provisions now govern interest payment on pre-deposits. Since refund was processed within prescribed timeframe, no interest liability arose. Tribunal emphasized that post-2014 Finance Act amendments, pre-deposits are governed by provisions existing at time of deposit. Appeal dismissed with no interest awarded on refunded amount.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
