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...
Page of 4801
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
341 to 360 of 96001 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Penalty u/s 78 of FA - there was a confusion at the field level for proper classification of activity undertaken by the appellant as to whether it is under ‘Business Auxiliary Service’ or under ‘Business Support Service’ and there have been multiplicity of interpretation - appellant had also deposited the entire amount of ST demanded under the SCN with interest before issuance of SCN - imposition of penalty u/s 78 is not warranted
Penalty u/s 78 of FA - there was a confusion at the field level for proper classification of activity undertaken by the appellant as to whether it is under ‘Business Auxiliary Service’ or under ‘Business Support Service’ and there have been multiplicity of interpretation - appellant had also deposited the entire amount of ST demanded under the SCN with interest before issuance of SCN - imposition of penalty u/s 78 is not warranted
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.