Authentication of paper assessment orders upheld, while qualifying repairs, consumables and vendor advance write-offs remain deductible business claim...
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...
Faceless reassessment under the IT Act was challenged on the ground that the notice under section 148 had to be issued by the Faceless Assessing Officer and not the jurisdictional officer for alleged non-compliance with section 151A. Without deciding that merits question, the Court directed revival of the pending appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), permitted the petitioner to raise all grounds including limitation, stayed operation of the assessment order during the appeal, and ordered expeditious disposal.
Faceless reassessment under the IT Act was challenged on the ground that the notice under section 148 had to be issued by the Faceless Assessing Officer and not the jurisdictional officer for alleged non-compliance with section 151A. Without deciding that merits question, the Court directed revival of the pending appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), permitted the petitioner to raise all grounds including limitation, stayed operation of the assessment order during the appeal, and ordered expeditious disposal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.