TNMM functional comparability requires excluding rice manufacturers from a pure Basmati rice trader's benchmark and recognising operating export recei...
Working-capital adjustment subsumes delayed-receivable effects in TNMM benchmarking of captive software-development services, avoiding separate notion...
Transfer-pricing comparability requires exclusion of financially illogical super-profit comparables and correction of unsupported annual-report and ma...
Charitable character assessment preserves Section 80G approval despite inclusive spiritual teachings and incidental religious expenditure within the s...
Penalty proceedings for cash-loan acceptance require assessment proceedings and recorded Assessing Officer satisfaction; absent these, the proceedings...
Functional comparability governs software-service benchmarking: dissimilar companies are excluded, while related-party filters, margins and working-ca...
CESTAT held that the appellant's refund claims following provisional assessment finalization were barred by unjust enrichment doctrine. While the appellant demonstrated they bore the duty burden and did not pass it to dealers through credit notes and CA certificates, they failed to establish that dealers did not subsequently transfer this burden to ultimate motorcycle consumers. Following Addison & Co. Ltd., there exists a presumption that duty incidence passes to buyers, and refunds are permissible only to those who ultimately bear the burden. The Original Authority's verification was inadequate as it only examined the first stage of transactions. Appeals were allowed by remand for proper verification of the complete duty burden trail.
CESTAT held that the appellant's refund claims following provisional assessment finalization were barred by unjust enrichment doctrine. While the appellant demonstrated they bore the duty burden and did not pass it to dealers through credit notes and CA certificates, they failed to establish that dealers did not subsequently transfer this burden to ultimate motorcycle consumers. Following Addison & Co. Ltd., there exists a presumption that duty incidence passes to buyers, and refunds are permissible only to those who ultimately bear the burden. The Original Authority's verification was inadequate as it only examined the first stage of transactions. Appeals were allowed by remand for proper verification of the complete duty burden trail.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.