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 dismissed the appeal regarding IGST refund claims for manually paid TR6 challans. The tribunal consistently held that exporters cannot claim refund under Section 142(3) of CGST Act, 2017, for duties paid due to non-fulfillment of export obligations. Despite Supreme Court's acknowledgment of procedural gaps and CBIC's subsequent circular prescribing corrective measures, the existing statutory framework precludes refund entitlement. The decision reaffirms prior judicial precedents, specifically referencing similar rulings in comparable cases, thereby maintaining a strict interpretation of statutory provisions governing import duty and tax credit mechanisms.
CESTAT dismissed the appeal regarding IGST refund claims for manually paid TR6 challans. The tribunal consistently held that exporters cannot claim refund under Section 142(3) of CGST Act, 2017, for duties paid due to non-fulfillment of export obligations. Despite Supreme Court's acknowledgment of procedural gaps and CBIC's subsequent circular prescribing corrective measures, the existing statutory framework precludes refund entitlement. The decision reaffirms prior judicial precedents, specifically referencing similar rulings in comparable cases, thereby maintaining a strict interpretation of statutory provisions governing import duty and tax credit mechanisms.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.