Benami transaction and beneficial ownership: documentary and circumstantial evidence show payors were true beneficiaries, resulting in PBPTA consequen...
Denial of Preferential Treatment under SAFTA overturned where unchallenged Country of Origin certificate warranted exemption under Notification benefi...
Continuing offence of money-laundering: discharge set aside and proceedings reinstated where laundering continued after inclusion of predicate offence...
Refund claims arising from an appellate order must be filed within one year from the date of that order under Section 27(1B)(b); the later filing here was therefore time-barred. The Tribunal also held that Section 26 did not apply because the case was not one of return or re-importation of exported goods, and in any event that provision contained its own time requirement, which was not met. The pending Revenue appeal did not alter the statutory limitation period. The rejection of the refund application on limitation grounds was upheld.
Refund claims arising from an appellate order must be filed within one year from the date of that order under Section 27(1B)(b); the later filing here was therefore time-barred. The Tribunal also held that Section 26 did not apply because the case was not one of return or re-importation of exported goods, and in any event that provision contained its own time requirement, which was not met. The pending Revenue appeal did not alter the statutory limitation period. The rejection of the refund application on limitation grounds was upheld.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.