Transaction value cannot be rejected solely on non-statutory valuation guidelines without corroborative evidence supporting reassessment of final cust...
Cross-examination rights and corroborated evidence limit customs penalties for misdeclaration in genuine import transactions involving documented clea...
Tariff classification of vehicle gear components follows the specific gearing entry, displacing motor-vehicle parts classification and related liabili...
Necessary-party requirements limit impleadment of independent entities, while deferred consideration does not create an appealable adverse determinati...
Food supplement classification requires common parlance and authoritative tests, preventing treatment as proprietary Ayurvedic medicines without suppo...
In a post-GST real estate project, the Tribunal accepted the DGAP report and rejected the anti-profiteering objection because the flat booking, construction agreement, sale deed, and full payment all occurred in the GST era, while the building permit and RERA registration were also obtained after GST began. Applying the principle that no comparative pre-GST to post-GST input tax credit benefit arises where the entire project activity and buyer transaction are post-GST, it found no basis for commensurate price reduction under Section 171 and no profiteering. The Tribunal also rejected the claim to a 1% affordable housing rate, holding that the concessional rate applied only from 01.04.2019 and did not assist a transaction completed earlier.
In a post-GST real estate project, the Tribunal accepted the DGAP report and rejected the anti-profiteering objection because the flat booking, construction agreement, sale deed, and full payment all occurred in the GST era, while the building permit and RERA registration were also obtained after GST began. Applying the principle that no comparative pre-GST to post-GST input tax credit benefit arises where the entire project activity and buyer transaction are post-GST, it found no basis for commensurate price reduction under Section 171 and no profiteering. The Tribunal also rejected the claim to a 1% affordable housing rate, holding that the concessional rate applied only from 01.04.2019 and did not assist a transaction completed earlier.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
