Donor-directed corpus contributions retain capital character despite exemption claims under section 10(23C)(vi), preventing their treatment as taxable...
Enhanced tax-audit threshold applies where banking records establish compliant non-cash receipts and payments, eliminating penalty exposure for audit ...
Transfer pricing consistency protects identical non-interest-bearing debenture terms from a later notional-interest adjustment without valid statutory...
Rectification of debatable deduction claims cannot reverse scrutiny-approved co-operative society interest income deductions as apparent record errors...
Cash-method accounting bars presumptive interest taxation, while unsupported securities and share-trading additions require reliable material and veri...
Page of 4814
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
181 to 200 of 96262 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 duty paid under protest was held to arise only after the underlying dispute on exemption or classification is finally settled in the assessee's own case. Applying Dena Snuff, the Tribunal found that the decisive question was whether a legally enforceable cause of action for refund existed on the date of the application, not the later success on exemption entitlement. Because the eligibility dispute had not been finally decided when the refund was filed, the claim was premature and correctly rejected. The Tribunal also noted that a show cause notice under section 28 of the Customs Act requires an existing cause of action and that protective demands issued without one are not sustainable.
Refund of duty paid under protest was held to arise only after the underlying dispute on exemption or classification is finally settled in the assessee's own case. Applying Dena Snuff, the Tribunal found that the decisive question was whether a legally enforceable cause of action for refund existed on the date of the application, not the later success on exemption entitlement. Because the eligibility dispute had not been finally decided when the refund was filed, the claim was premature and correctly rejected. The Tribunal also noted that a show cause notice under section 28 of the Customs Act requires an existing cause of action and that protective demands issued without one are not sustainable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.