Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
The appellant challenged the encashment of a bank guarantee by the revenue during the pendency of an appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal held that the bank guarantee, furnished as security pending final adjudication, does not constitute payment of duty and cannot be encashed without the Tribunal's permission. Relying on Supreme Court precedents, the Tribunal found the revenue's action improper and contrary to Section 27 of the Customs Act, which cannot be used to unjustly retain amounts not legally due. The impugned order permitting encashment was set aside, and the revenue was directed to refund the amount secured by the bank guarantee to the appellant forthwith. The appeal was accordingly allowed.
The appellant challenged the encashment of a bank guarantee by the revenue during the pendency of an appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal held that the bank guarantee, furnished as security pending final adjudication, does not constitute payment of duty and cannot be encashed without the Tribunal's permission. Relying on Supreme Court precedents, the Tribunal found the revenue's action improper and contrary to Section 27 of the Customs Act, which cannot be used to unjustly retain amounts not legally due. The impugned order permitting encashment was set aside, and the revenue was directed to refund the amount secured by the bank guarantee to the appellant forthwith. The appeal was accordingly allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.