Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
The HC allowed the petitioner's writ and directed the respondent to refund the wrongly retained tax together with interest under s.243 until payment, holding that the respondent lacked statutory authority to set off or retain the amount because it failed to demonstrate any tax liability due from the petitioner. The court emphasized that recovery of tax requires a specific charging provision and rejected reliance on prior authorities as inapplicable to the distinct cause of action. Consequential relief in the form of interest was granted and the respondent was ordered to complete the refund process within ten weeks from communication of the order.
The HC allowed the petitioner's writ and directed the respondent to refund the wrongly retained tax together with interest under s.243 until payment, holding that the respondent lacked statutory authority to set off or retain the amount because it failed to demonstrate any tax liability due from the petitioner. The court emphasized that recovery of tax requires a specific charging provision and rejected reliance on prior authorities as inapplicable to the distinct cause of action. Consequential relief in the form of interest was granted and the respondent was ordered to complete the refund process within ten weeks from communication of the order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4786
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
