Transfer pricing and tax deductions upheld on established principles, while employee contributions and warranty provisions returned for fresh examinat...
Captive transfer pricing relies on industrial consumer tariffs, while genuine quotations can benchmark effluent treatment transfers under the Other Me...
Specific tariff classification for ophthalmic instruments and extended limitation principles determine the treatment of duty demands, confiscation, an...
Integrated golf function determines classification, placing launch monitors and simulators under other golf equipment rather than measuring instrument...
Public servant status under anti-corruption law extends to recognised stock exchange leadership; constitutional and sanction challenges do not succeed...
Acquiescence, homebuyer protection and clean-slate resolution principles prevent landowners from disrupting an integrated project through late termina...
Liability to pay interest upon finalization of provisional assessment prior to insertion of sub-section (3) in Section 18 of the Customs Act, 1962 - The CESTAT analyzed Section 18(3) of the Customs Act, which imposes interest liability on the importer or exporter upon final assessment order. However, this provision was inserted after the provisional assessment in question.The Tribunal cited legal principles stating that legislation is prospective unless expressly made retrospective. Previous cases and statutory interpretations affirmed this principle.It was concluded that the amendment to Section 18 was substantive and not clarificatory, thus lacking retrospective applicability.
Liability to pay interest upon finalization of provisional assessment prior to insertion of sub-section (3) in Section 18 of the Customs Act, 1962 - The CESTAT analyzed Section 18(3) of the Customs Act, which imposes interest liability on the importer or exporter upon final assessment order. However, this provision was inserted after the provisional assessment in question.The Tribunal cited legal principles stating that legislation is prospective unless expressly made retrospective. Previous cases and statutory interpretations affirmed this principle.It was concluded that the amendment to Section 18 was substantive and not clarificatory, thus lacking retrospective applicability.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.