Retrospective application of beneficial circulars upheld, binding officers and granting post adjudication relief where adjudication occurred after cir...
Admissibility of Investigation Statements requires witness examination before the adjudicating authority; otherwise statements cannot sustain a penalt...
Transaction value and connected person treatment in excise valuation: proprietary concerns not inter connected undertakings, relief on valuation and c...
Appointment of Registrars as adjudicating officers under Companies Act reallocates territorial jurisdiction and sets appeal route to Regional Director...
Coercive recovery could not be used to defeat a subsisting statutory right of appeal where the appeal period under the Act and the relevant notification had not expired. The High Court protected the petitioner from recovery because the petitioner stated an intention to file an appeal with a stay application within the available period; if the appeal is filed, the statutory pre-deposit requirement of 10% would apply and recovery would not be pursued in any event. The petition was disposed of with liberty to the Department to recover dues in accordance with law if no appeal is filed, while all merits were kept open.
Coercive recovery could not be used to defeat a subsisting statutory right of appeal where the appeal period under the Act and the relevant notification had not expired. The High Court protected the petitioner from recovery because the petitioner stated an intention to file an appeal with a stay application within the available period; if the appeal is filed, the statutory pre-deposit requirement of 10% would apply and recovery would not be pursued in any event. The petition was disposed of with liberty to the Department to recover dues in accordance with law if no appeal is filed, while all merits were kept open.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4821 
Join Channel 
