Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
The CESTAT allowed the appeal filed by M/s X against the Revenue, holding that a Single Member Bench had jurisdiction under Section 129C(4) of the Customs Act, 1962 to decide a dispute confined solely to interest on refund of a revenue deposit, as interest is distinct from duty, fine or penalty and is not within the excluded categories. The Tribunal held that the assessee is legally entitled to interest on the refunded deposit of Rs. 5 crores, applying the doctrine of compensation for wrongful retention of money. It directed the Department to pay interest at 12% per annum from the date of deposit during investigation until the date of actual refund. The appeal was accordingly allowed, with the assessee's separate interest claim application held maintainable.
The CESTAT allowed the appeal filed by M/s X against the Revenue, holding that a Single Member Bench had jurisdiction under Section 129C(4) of the Customs Act, 1962 to decide a dispute confined solely to interest on refund of a revenue deposit, as interest is distinct from duty, fine or penalty and is not within the excluded categories. The Tribunal held that the assessee is legally entitled to interest on the refunded deposit of Rs. 5 crores, applying the doctrine of compensation for wrongful retention of money. It directed the Department to pay interest at 12% per annum from the date of deposit during investigation until the date of actual refund. The appeal was accordingly allowed, with the assessee's separate interest claim application held maintainable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
