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 allowed refund of customs duty paid twice through customs broker for same import consignment. Appellant demonstrated through Bill of Entry, payment challans, and chartered accountant certificate that duplicate duty payment occurred and financial burden was not passed to others. Original authority verified facts supporting refund claim. Tribunal rejected lower authority's finding that appellant failed to prove duty payment and burden bearing. Following Gujarat HC precedent in similar double payment scenarios, CESTAT held refund permissible when duty paid twice due to error without passing burden. Impugned order denying refund set aside as contrary to established facts and legal position. Appeal allowed with direction to process refund.
CESTAT allowed refund of customs duty paid twice through customs broker for same import consignment. Appellant demonstrated through Bill of Entry, payment challans, and chartered accountant certificate that duplicate duty payment occurred and financial burden was not passed to others. Original authority verified facts supporting refund claim. Tribunal rejected lower authority's finding that appellant failed to prove duty payment and burden bearing. Following Gujarat HC precedent in similar double payment scenarios, CESTAT held refund permissible when duty paid twice due to error without passing burden. Impugned order denying refund set aside as contrary to established facts and legal position. Appeal allowed with direction to process refund.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
