Form 26AS evidence requires successor-entity accounting verification after business transfer, while invoice-supported related-party advertising expend...
Money-laundering judgment timing requires awaiting the scheduled-offence decision despite continuation of the underlying trial where outcomes directly...
Accredited investor eligibility expands through securities-market exposure, while alternative investment fund disputes require prescribed resolution a...
SC held that the encashment of bank guarantees does not constitute payment of customs duty under Section 27 of the Customs Act. The respondents arbitrarily encashed bank guarantees without legal authorization, which constitutes unjust retention of funds. The Court directed immediate refund of the encashed amounts with 6% interest from the date of encashment, to be repaid within four months. The impugned High Court judgment was set aside, and the appeals were allowed without cost, affirming that the respondents had no legal right to retain the appellant's funds.
SC held that the encashment of bank guarantees does not constitute payment of customs duty under Section 27 of the Customs Act. The respondents arbitrarily encashed bank guarantees without legal authorization, which constitutes unjust retention of funds. The Court directed immediate refund of the encashed amounts with 6% interest from the date of encashment, to be repaid within four months. The impugned High Court judgment was set aside, and the appeals were allowed without cost, affirming that the respondents had no legal right to retain the appellant's funds.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4915 
