Alternative statutory remedy and unexplained delay barred writ review of customs confiscation adjudication, leaving merits for appellate consideration...
Authorised courier due diligence protects against penalties where declared exports conceal prohibited goods despite proper documentation and customs p...
Customs-controlled container movement now extends to DP World facilities, subject to segregation, inspections, reconciliation, and EXIM cargo priority...
HC held that tax deposited during investigation on non-taxable services, later found exempt, cannot be retained by the Department, as there was no authority of law to levy or collect such amount. It ruled that mere deposit or description as "service tax" does not convert a non-leviable amount into valid tax. Limitation under Section 102(3) of the Finance Act, 1994 and reliance on the exemption notification could not defeat the assessee's substantive right to refund, particularly after departmental acknowledgment of non-liability. The impugned order was set aside, and the appellant was held entitled to refund with applicable interest, preventing unjust enrichment of the Revenue.
HC held that tax deposited during investigation on non-taxable services, later found exempt, cannot be retained by the Department, as there was no authority of law to levy or collect such amount. It ruled that mere deposit or description as "service tax" does not convert a non-leviable amount into valid tax. Limitation under Section 102(3) of the Finance Act, 1994 and reliance on the exemption notification could not defeat the assessee's substantive right to refund, particularly after departmental acknowledgment of non-liability. The impugned order was set aside, and the appellant was held entitled to refund with applicable interest, preventing unjust enrichment of the Revenue.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
