Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
Provisional anti-dumping duty collected on import of copper clad laminates was held refundable once the provisional levy was withdrawn without confirmation. The Tribunal noted that Rule 21 of the Anti-Dumping Rules required refund of any collection made between imposition and withdrawal, and that a separate refund application was not a basis to defeat the claim. It further held that the doctrine of unjust enrichment could not be imported to deny refund under this rule, and that treatment of the amount as expenditure in the books or the absence of a receivable entry did not by itself establish unjust enrichment. The appellate order was set aside and refund with applicable interest was directed.
Provisional anti-dumping duty collected on import of copper clad laminates was held refundable once the provisional levy was withdrawn without confirmation. The Tribunal noted that Rule 21 of the Anti-Dumping Rules required refund of any collection made between imposition and withdrawal, and that a separate refund application was not a basis to defeat the claim. It further held that the doctrine of unjust enrichment could not be imported to deny refund under this rule, and that treatment of the amount as expenditure in the books or the absence of a receivable entry did not by itself establish unjust enrichment. The appellate order was set aside and refund with applicable interest was directed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4830 
Join Channel 
