Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
Page of 4790
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
141 to 160 of 95794 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Rule 12(4) of the capacity-based cess scheme for pan masala packing machines is described as valid because the Cess Act, Rule 12 and Schedule II operate as an integrated framework. Monthly cess is computed by reference to the maximum number of installed operational machines during the month, with capacity determined by rated speed and packing weight rather than installation date. The rule was found consistent with the parent statute and constitutional guarantees under Articles 14 and 19(1)(g). Abatement applies only where a machine remains continuously inoperative for at least fifteen days; machines installed later and subsequently operated cannot be treated as inoperative before installation. The reported writ petition was dismissed, subject to the statutory appellate remedy for the abatement rejection.
Rule 12(4) of the capacity-based cess scheme for pan masala packing machines is described as valid because the Cess Act, Rule 12 and Schedule II operate as an integrated framework. Monthly cess is computed by reference to the maximum number of installed operational machines during the month, with capacity determined by rated speed and packing weight rather than installation date. The rule was found consistent with the parent statute and constitutional guarantees under Articles 14 and 19(1)(g). Abatement applies only where a machine remains continuously inoperative for at least fifteen days; machines installed later and subsequently operated cannot be treated as inoperative before installation. The reported writ petition was dismissed, subject to the statutory appellate remedy for the abatement rejection.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4790
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
