Alternative statutory remedy and unexplained delay barred writ review of customs confiscation adjudication, leaving merits for appellate consideration...
Authorised courier due diligence protects against penalties where declared exports conceal prohibited goods despite proper documentation and customs p...
Customs-controlled container movement now extends to DP World facilities, subject to segregation, inspections, reconciliation, and EXIM cargo priority...
HC held that the assessee failed to deposit 20% of the disputed demand (Rs. 69,05,933/-) as a pre-condition for staying the demand for AY 2016-17. The outstanding demand was consequently recovered from the refund due for AY 2014-15 through an appeal effect order. The court rejected the assessee's contention that the refund adjustment was contrary to the office memorandum, thereby upholding the tax authority's action of recovering the disputed amount through available refund mechanisms.
HC held that the assessee failed to deposit 20% of the disputed demand (Rs. 69,05,933/-) as a pre-condition for staying the demand for AY 2016-17. The outstanding demand was consequently recovered from the refund due for AY 2014-15 through an appeal effect order. The court rejected the assessee's contention that the refund adjustment was contrary to the office memorandum, thereby upholding the tax authority's action of recovering the disputed amount through available refund mechanisms.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.