Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Page of 4794
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1 to 20 of 95872 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Conversion of shipping bills - conversion from Draw Back Scheme to Advance License Scheme - The Tribunal examined the provisions of Circular No. 36/2010 and concluded that while conversion from more rigorous to less rigorous examination schemes was permitted, the reverse was not allowed. Since the appellants sought conversion to a scheme involving more rigorous examination after availing benefits under the Drawback Scheme, their request was denied. The CESTAT upheld the validity of condition 3(e) of the circular, which precluded conversion after availing benefits under a particular scheme. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, affirming the decision of the lower authority.
Conversion of shipping bills - conversion from Draw Back Scheme to Advance License Scheme - The Tribunal examined the provisions of Circular No. 36/2010 and concluded that while conversion from more rigorous to less rigorous examination schemes was permitted, the reverse was not allowed. Since the appellants sought conversion to a scheme involving more rigorous examination after availing benefits under the Drawback Scheme, their request was denied. The CESTAT upheld the validity of condition 3(e) of the circular, which precluded conversion after availing benefits under a particular scheme. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, affirming the decision of the lower authority.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
