International transaction characterisation of domestic divestment of support services business rejected; transaction between resident associated enter...
Minimum Import Price restrictions for Black Pepper, Areca-nuts and Apples upheld; procedural laying failure not fatal, notifications to be placed befo...
Transaction value between related persons requires market-equivalent pricing; importer must prove declared value mirrors ordinary international trade ...
Classification of exported insecticides under export tariff affirmed; reclassification and related penalties set aside and MEIS scrip jurisdiction rec...
Where recovery of a disputed demand was stayed under section 220(6), the High Court held that the Department could not adjust a later-year refund against that stayed demand. The adjustment was treated as illegal, arbitrary and perfunctory because the stay remained operative until disposal of the first appeal. The Court exercised writ jurisdiction to interfere and directed release of the refund computed under the intimation for the later assessment year, together with statutory interest under section 244A, within the time fixed by the Court.
Where recovery of a disputed demand was stayed under section 220(6), the High Court held that the Department could not adjust a later-year refund against that stayed demand. The adjustment was treated as illegal, arbitrary and perfunctory because the stay remained operative until disposal of the first appeal. The Court exercised writ jurisdiction to interfere and directed release of the refund computed under the intimation for the later assessment year, together with statutory interest under section 244A, within the time fixed by the Court.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.