Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Reassessment jurisdiction fails where unverified portal information is aggregated without examining the taxpayer's explanation or relevance of entries...
Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
Transfer pricing margin adjustments require matching treatment of non-operating income and related costs, with comparability issues reconsidered on ev...
Preliminary-expense amortisation and MAT exempt-income adjustments prevailed, while trademark costs and managerial remuneration require fresh verifica...
Export valuation requires contemporaneous evidence; unrelated invoices cannot prove overvaluation, and dual penalties on firm and partner are impermis...
Ratification of resignation acceptance validates separation retrospectively, while withdrawal may be refused through reasoned administrative discretio...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
321 to 340 of 96174 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
A dispute over exemption from Special Additional Duty under Notification No. 102/2007-Cus was treated as a question directly linked to the rate of duty applicable for assessment. Applying the Navin Chemicals test, the Court held that such a question falls outside the High Court's appellate jurisdiction under Section 130 of the Customs Act and is appealable only to the Supreme Court under Section 130E. The departmental appeal before the High Court was therefore closed as not maintainable, with liberty to approach the Supreme Court.
A dispute over exemption from Special Additional Duty under Notification No. 102/2007-Cus was treated as a question directly linked to the rate of duty applicable for assessment. Applying the Navin Chemicals test, the Court held that such a question falls outside the High Court's appellate jurisdiction under Section 130 of the Customs Act and is appealable only to the Supreme Court under Section 130E. The departmental appeal before the High Court was therefore closed as not maintainable, with liberty to approach the Supreme Court.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4809 
Join Channel 
