Functional comparability governs selection of support-service and IT-enabled service comparables, with verification required for unresolved data and m...
Bank account freezing requires statutory authority; anti-money-laundering compliance and KYC monitoring do not permit unilateral indefinite restrictio...
CESTAT dismissed appeal regarding interest claim on refunded pre-deposit u/ss 35F and 35FF of Central Excise Act. Appellant had deposited amounts through CENVAT account reversal, which were later appropriated as duty. Though Tribunal previously allowed appellant's main appeal, the current dispute centered on interest eligibility. Following statutory interpretation and Supreme Court precedent in similar cases, CESTAT determined that since refund was processed within prescribed timeframe, no interest was payable on pre-deposit amount. The Tribunal distinguished earlier decisions allowing 12% interest, noting those cases dealt with deposits made when no specific provisions for refund with interest existed. Appeal lacked merit as current statutory framework did not mandate interest payment under these circumstances.
CESTAT dismissed appeal regarding interest claim on refunded pre-deposit u/ss 35F and 35FF of Central Excise Act. Appellant had deposited amounts through CENVAT account reversal, which were later appropriated as duty. Though Tribunal previously allowed appellant's main appeal, the current dispute centered on interest eligibility. Following statutory interpretation and Supreme Court precedent in similar cases, CESTAT determined that since refund was processed within prescribed timeframe, no interest was payable on pre-deposit amount. The Tribunal distinguished earlier decisions allowing 12% interest, noting those cases dealt with deposits made when no specific provisions for refund with interest existed. Appeal lacked merit as current statutory framework did not mandate interest payment under these circumstances.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.