Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
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.