Invoice-based recovery claims remain time-barred despite separate winding-up proceedings, absent valid acknowledgment or part-payment of the disputed ...
Extended limitation fails without specific suppression allegations, while overseas employee secondment remains taxable as manpower supply within norma...
Time-share accommodation classification excludes Club or Association Service where purchasers receive contractual occupancy rights without genuine mem...
CENVAT credit for trading requires reversal, while taxable-service rental credit remains proportionately available and limitation issues await resolut...
Vicarious liability for dishonoured company cheques may extend to non-signatory directors where complaints contain foundational responsibility avermen...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
321 to 340 of 96092 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Extended limitation for a customs demand was not available where the show cause notice was issued beyond the normal period and the dispute concerned a technical claim for notification benefit; mere claim of misclassification or benefit under the notification did not amount to suppression or wilful misstatement when the imports as CKD condition were disclosed in the Bills of Entry and invoices. Differential duty could not be recovered by reopening self-assessed Bills of Entry without first challenging that assessment. Redemption fine also failed because the goods had already been cleared and were not available for confiscation. With the principal demand unsustainable, interest and penalty were likewise set aside.
Extended limitation for a customs demand was not available where the show cause notice was issued beyond the normal period and the dispute concerned a technical claim for notification benefit; mere claim of misclassification or benefit under the notification did not amount to suppression or wilful misstatement when the imports as CKD condition were disclosed in the Bills of Entry and invoices. Differential duty could not be recovered by reopening self-assessed Bills of Entry without first challenging that assessment. Redemption fine also failed because the goods had already been cleared and were not available for confiscation. With the principal demand unsustainable, interest and penalty were likewise set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.