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...
Refund Claim - In the present case the appellants are the consumer of the goods and have utilized the said goods in creation of Konkan Rail Project, for which the adhoc exemption order Of 1994 and the 2002 issued - the bar of unjust enrichment as in Section 11B is not a absolute bar but a rebuttable presumption - refund allowed.
Refund Claim - In the present case the appellants are the consumer of the goods and have utilized the said goods in creation of Konkan Rail Project, for which the adhoc exemption order Of 1994 and the 2002 issued - the bar of unjust enrichment as in Section 11B is not a absolute bar but a rebuttable presumption - refund allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
