Proceeds of crime: provisional attachment confirmed; equivalent value attachment and acquisition date fair market value upheld, Covid exclusion preser...
Effective service requirement: officers must explore alternative service modes beyond the GST portal and afford personal hearing; non-compliance voids...
A refund of Extra Duty Deposit was held not hit by unjust enrichment where the disputed amount had been shown as recoverable in the relevant balance sheet, supported by a Chartered Accountant certificate, and the payment had been made from a promoter's loan that was a transaction distinct from the import itself. The Tribunal found that such loan funding did not amount to passing on the duty incidence to another person, so credit to the Consumer Welfare Fund was unsustainable and the refund was payable to the appellant. It also held that interest was payable on the delayed refund in accordance with the Customs Act, applying the principle in Ranbaxy Laboratories.
A refund of Extra Duty Deposit was held not hit by unjust enrichment where the disputed amount had been shown as recoverable in the relevant balance sheet, supported by a Chartered Accountant certificate, and the payment had been made from a promoter's loan that was a transaction distinct from the import itself. The Tribunal found that such loan funding did not amount to passing on the duty incidence to another person, so credit to the Consumer Welfare Fund was unsustainable and the refund was payable to the appellant. It also held that interest was payable on the delayed refund in accordance with the Customs Act, applying the principle in Ranbaxy Laboratories.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4821 
Join Channel 
