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...
Governmental authority status supports construction-service exemption, while pre-cutoff contract and stamp-duty compliance requires verification on re...
Automated Free Sale and Commerce Certificates enable paperless processing while retaining risk-based manual verification for selected exporter applica...
Page of 4830
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96587 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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.