Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
Bluetooth-enabled wireless headsets, earphones, earbuds and neckbands were held classifiable as transmission or reception apparatus under CTH 85176290 because their essential character and principal function was to receive, convert and transmit voice and data in a wireless network, not merely to carry audio signals. The Tribunal relied on Board Circular No. 36/2013-Cus. and prior CESTAT reasoning to treat such devices as active parts of a wireless network, while headphones with only audio functionality remain under heading 8518. The reclassification under CTH 85183000 was set aside, and the consequential duty demand based on that classification did not survive.
Bluetooth-enabled wireless headsets, earphones, earbuds and neckbands were held classifiable as transmission or reception apparatus under CTH 85176290 because their essential character and principal function was to receive, convert and transmit voice and data in a wireless network, not merely to carry audio signals. The Tribunal relied on Board Circular No. 36/2013-Cus. and prior CESTAT reasoning to treat such devices as active parts of a wireless network, while headphones with only audio functionality remain under heading 8518. The reclassification under CTH 85183000 was set aside, and the consequential duty demand based on that classification did not survive.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4811 
Join Channel 
