Authorities can’t have control over any amount paid as deposit or pre-deposit during investigation: CESTAT
CESTAT further held that amount deposited by assessee during investigation could not be retained after demand of excise was set aside.
pre deposit
Madras High Court waives Swiss Garnier’s pre-deposit contemplated under S. 19 of MSMED Act for setting aside an award
The statutory authority under the MSMED Act would only have the jurisdiction to entertain a dispute when the supplier had been registered as a Micro or Small enterprise under the MSMED Act at that relevant point of time.
Delhi High Court directs VAT Authorities to process Flipkart’s VAT refund along with interest
A pre-deposit does not partake the character of a tax or duty. Those are sums which are deposited by an assessed solely for the purposes of pursuing the remedy of appeal.
District Court must examine whether pre-deposit of 75% of award under Section 19 of the MSME Act is actually deposited: Himachal Pradesh High Court
Himachal Pradesh High Court set aside the impugned order and directed the District Court to decide the matter afresh.
Borrower to pre-deposit 50% of the “debt due” including ‘interest’ under Section 18 of SARFAESI Act: Supreme Court
The Court was called upon to decide as to while calculating the amount to be deposited as predeposit under Section 18 of the SARFAESI Act, 50% of which amount the borrower is required to deposit as pre-deposit and whether while calculating the amount of “debt due”, the amount deposited by the auction purchaser on purchase of the secured assets is required to be adjusted and/or appropriated towards the amount of pre-deposit to be deposited by the borrower under Section 18 of the SARFAESI Act.
CESTAT | Amount deposited during the investigation, ipso facto, becomes pre-deposit when the assessee carries the dispute before the Appellate Forum
Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal: Anil Choudhary (Judicial Member) dismissed applications filed by the Revenue pertaining to rectification of mistakes.
Ori HC | Whether Proviso to Sub-Section (5) of S. 43 of Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 is ultravires of Constitution of India? HC denies
Orissa High Court: A Division Bench of S.K. Mishra and Savitri Ratho, JJ., dismissed the petition being devoid of merits. The instant
Explained| Pre-deposit of 75% of arbitration award amount under Section 19 of the MSME Act, 2006 mandatory or discretionary?
Supreme Court: The bench of MR Shah* and AS Bopanna, JJ has held that in an appeal/application filed under Section 34 of