ESOP expenditure allowed as FMV difference; long-term capital gain issue sent back for collector rate determination; deferred income additions disallo...
Appeal allowed; impugned order quashed as regulator failed to prove nexus or manipulative scheme; sale genuine - s.12A(a)-(c), Regs 3(a)-(d),4(1),4(2)...
Appellant's ring-back tone service held OIDAR, taxable domestically for 01.07.2012-31.07.2016; liability confirmed, penalties vacated, remanded for re...
CESTAT allowed the appeals, holding that the appellants discharged the statutory burden under s.27, Customs Act, 1962, by producing a Chartered Accountant's certificate and record evidence demonstrating that imported goods were sold below cost. The Tribunal applied the principle that such admissible proof shifts the onus to the revenue to adduce affirmative evidence that duty was passed on to buyers. The revenue failed to rebut the presumption of non-passing-on or to establish recovery of duty-inclusive prices; consequently the bar of unjust enrichment was held inapplicable. Relief was granted to the appellants and the refunds sought were thereby held admissible.
CESTAT allowed the appeals, holding that the appellants discharged the statutory burden under s.27, Customs Act, 1962, by producing a Chartered Accountant's certificate and record evidence demonstrating that imported goods were sold below cost. The Tribunal applied the principle that such admissible proof shifts the onus to the revenue to adduce affirmative evidence that duty was passed on to buyers. The revenue failed to rebut the presumption of non-passing-on or to establish recovery of duty-inclusive prices; consequently the bar of unjust enrichment was held inapplicable. Relief was granted to the appellants and the refunds sought were thereby held admissible.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4821 
Join Channel 
