Regulatory consolidation for investment advisers: SEBI issues master circular consolidating guidance and prescribing compliance, reporting, fees and s...
Reopening of assessment cannot rest solely on an audit party's opinion; reassessment under Section 147/148 is impermissible and power of revision shou...
Tested party selection: functional analysis identified the least complex unit as the appropriate tested party, altering the transfer pricing adjustmen...
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 
