Customs valuation and import permissibility conflict resolved: accepted enhancement of transaction value removes liability for confiscation and penalt...
Attachment and proclamation of sale of immovable property: limitation treated from financial year end; proclamation held within period, petition dismi...
Second Schedule attachment and validity of a post-notice mortgage: TRO cannot declare mortgage void ab initio; sale and appropriation allowed thereaft...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
6601 to 6620 of 96333 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Refund of customs duty deposited during investigation was denied on unjust enrichment on the ground that the amount was booked as expenditure in the profit and loss account. This was held to be an incorrect test; the determinative inquiry is whether the duty incidence was passed to customers through enhanced sale price. As the invoices reflected only material cost, labour charges and VAT, with no recovery of customs duty, and there was no evidence of post-duty price increase, the burden was held not to have been passed on, making unjust enrichment inapplicable. The impugned order was set aside and refund was allowed. - CESTAT
Refund of customs duty deposited during investigation was denied on unjust enrichment on the ground that the amount was booked as expenditure in the profit and loss account. This was held to be an incorrect test; the determinative inquiry is whether the duty incidence was passed to customers through enhanced sale price. As the invoices reflected only material cost, labour charges and VAT, with no recovery of customs duty, and there was no evidence of post-duty price increase, the burden was held not to have been passed on, making unjust enrichment inapplicable. The impugned order was set aside and refund was allowed. - CESTAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.