Religious purpose exclusion versus charitable purpose: non overriding religious objects do not attract Explanation 3, registration directed under sect...
Search-assessment proviso jurisdiction, time-barred valuation reports, and denial of cross-examination vitiate valuation-based and confession-based ad...
Proceeds of crime: provisional attachment confirmed; equivalent value attachment and acquisition date fair market value upheld, Covid exclusion preser...
The dominant issue was whether refund of excess additional duty of customs could be rejected on the ground that it did not arise from a valid reassessment as required under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 in light of ITC Ltd. The Tribunal held that self-assessment under Section 17, reassessment under Sections 17/128, and amendments/corrections under Sections 149/154 constitute "assessment" for Section 27 purposes, and that a speaking reassessment order had in fact been passed but was ignored by the appellate authority. Consequently, the rejection of the refund was legally unsustainable and was set aside, restoring entitlement to refund. - CESTAT
The dominant issue was whether refund of excess additional duty of customs could be rejected on the ground that it did not arise from a valid reassessment as required under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 in light of ITC Ltd. The Tribunal held that self-assessment under Section 17, reassessment under Sections 17/128, and amendments/corrections under Sections 149/154 constitute "assessment" for Section 27 purposes, and that a speaking reassessment order had in fact been passed but was ignored by the appellate authority. Consequently, the rejection of the refund was legally unsustainable and was set aside, restoring entitlement to refund. - CESTAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
