Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
A bona fide transferee of a duty-free licence re-registered in the customs system was held not liable for customs duty merely because the licence was later alleged to have been fraudulently re-registered. The Tribunal distinguished an existing licence that had been re-registered from a fake or forged licence, and applied the principle that a purchaser for value cannot be denied benefit where the licence was validly in circulation and acted upon during its validity. It also held that the extended period was unavailable because the notice relied only on an alleged failure to verify the licence, without any misrepresentation, collusion, or suppression by the purchaser. The demand and impugned order were set aside.
A bona fide transferee of a duty-free licence re-registered in the customs system was held not liable for customs duty merely because the licence was later alleged to have been fraudulently re-registered. The Tribunal distinguished an existing licence that had been re-registered from a fake or forged licence, and applied the principle that a purchaser for value cannot be denied benefit where the licence was validly in circulation and acted upon during its validity. It also held that the extended period was unavailable because the notice relied only on an alleged failure to verify the licence, without any misrepresentation, collusion, or suppression by the purchaser. The demand and impugned order were set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.