Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
E-rickshaw supplies in CKD/SKD form qualify for GST treatment as the finished electrically operated vehicle only when all components needed to assemble a complete vehicle are supplied together as one identifiable kit or package, and the consignment contents and contemporaneous commercial records consistently match that description. The AAAR rejected the motor-plus-three-components test because it does not arise from Rule 2(a), the tariff, or the rate notification, and held that individual parts cannot be classified as the finished vehicle merely because some are essential components. It also noted that customs interpretative fiction under Rule 2(a) has a limited scope and cannot be extended beyond customs classification.
E-rickshaw supplies in CKD/SKD form qualify for GST treatment as the finished electrically operated vehicle only when all components needed to assemble a complete vehicle are supplied together as one identifiable kit or package, and the consignment contents and contemporaneous commercial records consistently match that description. The AAAR rejected the motor-plus-three-components test because it does not arise from Rule 2(a), the tariff, or the rate notification, and held that individual parts cannot be classified as the finished vehicle merely because some are essential components. It also noted that customs interpretative fiction under Rule 2(a) has a limited scope and cannot be extended beyond customs classification.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.