TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal waives pre-deposit, grants stay of recovery, and schedules appeal for regular hearing.</h1> The Tribunal found merit in the appellant's arguments regarding both issues raised in the case. Consequently, the condition for pre-deposit was waived, ... Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit Issues:1. Shortfall in export obligation demand2. Inclusion of design and engineering charges in the assessable value of imported goodsIssue 1: Shortfall in export obligation demandThe appellant was asked to pay a significant sum for the shortfall in export obligation. The appellant contended that the demand was not sustainable due to clearance granted by DGFT authorities. This contention was supported by Board Circular No. 25/2003. The Tribunal considered the appellant's argument and found prima facie merit in it.Issue 2: Inclusion of design and engineering chargesA demand of a substantial amount was made on the grounds that design and engineering charges should be added to the assessable value of imported goods under Rule 9 of the Customs Valuation Rules. The appellant argued that the design and drawings were not necessary for the manufacture of the imported goods but for the fabrication of the plant in India. The Tribunal referenced decisions in similar cases to support the appellant's position. It was established that design and drawings were related to the fabrication of the plant and not the imported goods themselves.In conclusion, the Tribunal found merit in the appellant's arguments for both issues. As a result, the condition for pre-deposit was waived, and there was a stay of recovery of the demand. The appeal was scheduled for regular hearing on a specified date.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
