Charitable registration turns on predominant purpose and genuine activities, while incidental fees and related-party rent require supporting adverse m...
MAT book-profit adjustments exclude disallowances for exempt-income expenditure and demerger expenditure unless expressly listed under the statutory c...
Omitted specified domestic transaction provision invalidates related-party expenditure transfer-pricing references and assessments based on consequent...
Preventive suspension requires an immediate continuing threat and cannot become indefinite without inquiry, fresh evidence, or proportionate safeguard...
Page of 4807
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
401 to 420 of 96140 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
CESTAT held that imported refined oils and candelilla wax qualified for exemption under Notification No. 50/2017-Customs because approved laboratory reports showed the goods were of edible grade and there was no dispute on tariff classification. The notification required only that the goods fall under the specified headings and be refined edible grade; it did not impose any end-use requirement. The Tribunal also held that a CBEC circular could not add a condition not found in the notification, so the importer's declared use in cosmetics or pharmaceuticals could not defeat the exemption. The appellate order granting benefit under Serial Nos. 64 and 71 was upheld.
CESTAT held that imported refined oils and candelilla wax qualified for exemption under Notification No. 50/2017-Customs because approved laboratory reports showed the goods were of edible grade and there was no dispute on tariff classification. The notification required only that the goods fall under the specified headings and be refined edible grade; it did not impose any end-use requirement. The Tribunal also held that a CBEC circular could not add a condition not found in the notification, so the importer's declared use in cosmetics or pharmaceuticals could not defeat the exemption. The appellate order granting benefit under Serial Nos. 64 and 71 was upheld.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.