Allocation of registration charges: contractual clause overriding statutory presumption allowed as deduction against capital gain after unrebutted doc...
Expenditure tied to investments yielding exempt income restricted to attributable costs; broader disallowance disallowed and adjustments to WDV and mi...
Admissibility of Investigative Statements invalidated reliance on coerced emails and valuation redetermination, resulting in set aside of penalties an...
Classification of printed technical documents: specific Chapter 49.01 entry prevails, enabling claimed customs exemptions for imported manuals and rep...
Page of 4816
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
5281 to 5300 of 96301 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Entitlement to refund of countervailing duty and special additional duty paid on excess imports under advance authorisation was asserted on the basis that post GST CENVAT credit was unavailable; transitional provisions require refunds accruing after GST implementation to be paid in cash and admissible credit refunded accordingly, and therefore the departmental rejection was incorrect. The tribunal found the refund claim complied with transitional cash refund rules and Section 142(6)(a) principles and directed allowance of the refund. The tribunal also held unjust enrichment did not bar refund because the refund amount was disclosed in financial statements and a chartered accountant certified non pass through of the duty incidence.
Entitlement to refund of countervailing duty and special additional duty paid on excess imports under advance authorisation was asserted on the basis that post GST CENVAT credit was unavailable; transitional provisions require refunds accruing after GST implementation to be paid in cash and admissible credit refunded accordingly, and therefore the departmental rejection was incorrect. The tribunal found the refund claim complied with transitional cash refund rules and Section 142(6)(a) principles and directed allowance of the refund. The tribunal also held unjust enrichment did not bar refund because the refund amount was disclosed in financial statements and a chartered accountant certified non pass through of the duty incidence.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.