Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Limitation in oppression and mismanagement proceedings: prior knowledge of removal and dilution barred the challenge, with valuation directions upheld...
Insolvency professional agency governance rules amended to add nominee directors, tighten independent director eligibility, and regulate managing dire...
Amounts deposited during investigation at the Department's insistence and while duty liability was still contested were treated as payments made under a mistaken notion of liability, not as voluntary central excise duty. On that basis, the amount did not acquire the character of duty for denying interest under Section 11B. Following its earlier view in Harrisons Industries and distinguishing Goldy Engineering Works, the Tribunal held that interest was payable at 12% per annum on the refunded amount from the date of deposit until the date of refund.
Amounts deposited during investigation at the Department's insistence and while duty liability was still contested were treated as payments made under a mistaken notion of liability, not as voluntary central excise duty. On that basis, the amount did not acquire the character of duty for denying interest under Section 11B. Following its earlier view in Harrisons Industries and distinguishing Goldy Engineering Works, the Tribunal held that interest was payable at 12% per annum on the refunded amount from the date of deposit until the date of refund.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4814 
Join Channel 
