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 ruled in favor of the appellant, finding that the burden of duty had not been passed on to customers. The Tribunal held that when a Chartered Accountant's certificate is submitted to demonstrate no unjust enrichment, the Revenue must provide evidence to contradict it. The certificate cannot be dismissed without cogent contrary evidence. The Commissioner (Appeals) merely expressed doubt without seeking clarification from the appellant. The Tribunal concluded that the appellant had shown the differential customs duty as "receivables" in financial statements, establishing that the duty burden was not passed on. Accordingly, the impugned order directing credit to Consumer Welfare Fund was set aside, and the appellant was granted refund with interest.
CESTAT ruled in favor of the appellant, finding that the burden of duty had not been passed on to customers. The Tribunal held that when a Chartered Accountant's certificate is submitted to demonstrate no unjust enrichment, the Revenue must provide evidence to contradict it. The certificate cannot be dismissed without cogent contrary evidence. The Commissioner (Appeals) merely expressed doubt without seeking clarification from the appellant. The Tribunal concluded that the appellant had shown the differential customs duty as "receivables" in financial statements, establishing that the duty burden was not passed on. Accordingly, the impugned order directing credit to Consumer Welfare Fund was set aside, and the appellant was granted refund with interest.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.