Online bond platforms may offer overseas-regulated products and tax-specific bonds subject to disclosures, compliance safeguards and revised complianc...
Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
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.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4816 
Join Channel 
