Online bond platforms may offer overseas-regulated products and tax-specific bonds subject to disclosures, compliance safeguards and revised complianc...
Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
ELFA diagnostic kits were treated as covered by the ELISA exemption because the underlying enzyme-linked immunoassay principle remained the same and only the terminal detection method changed from colourimetric to fluorescence. The Tribunal held that strict construction of exemption entries cannot ignore scientific realities, and applied the genus-species principle and a purposive approach to conclude that technological advancement did not create a separate diagnostic class. It also held that the description of the goods as ELISA kits did not establish wilful suppression or intent to evade duty, so extended limitation was unsustainable. For the relevant period, IGST-related interest and penalty were also held not sustainable.
ELFA diagnostic kits were treated as covered by the ELISA exemption because the underlying enzyme-linked immunoassay principle remained the same and only the terminal detection method changed from colourimetric to fluorescence. The Tribunal held that strict construction of exemption entries cannot ignore scientific realities, and applied the genus-species principle and a purposive approach to conclude that technological advancement did not create a separate diagnostic class. It also held that the description of the goods as ELISA kits did not establish wilful suppression or intent to evade duty, so extended limitation was unsustainable. For the relevant period, IGST-related interest and penalty were also held not sustainable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.