Online bond platforms may offer overseas-regulated products and tax-specific bonds subject to disclosures, compliance safeguards and revised complianc...
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...
Monetary Limit in filing Revenue Appeal - threshold limit for filing appeals as per Central Board of Indirect Customs (CBIC) circulars - Instruction are binding effect Or not - The Tribunal examined the validity of this monetary limit and its applicability in the case, alongside interpreting relevant provisions of the Customs Act, 1962. - It found that while departmental officers are bound by CBIC instructions, courts, including the Tribunal, prioritize the interest of justice. The Tribunal held that the Commissioner (Appeals) had erred in not remanding the matter back to the proper officer for fresh decision/order as required by law. Additionally, it emphasized that circulars cannot override statutory provisions or judicial decisions and that the impugned instruction should not prejudice the department's rights. - The matter listed for final hearing on a specified date.
Monetary Limit in filing Revenue Appeal - threshold limit for filing appeals as per Central Board of Indirect Customs (CBIC) circulars - Instruction are binding effect Or not - The Tribunal examined the validity of this monetary limit and its applicability in the case, alongside interpreting relevant provisions of the Customs Act, 1962. - It found that while departmental officers are bound by CBIC instructions, courts, including the Tribunal, prioritize the interest of justice. The Tribunal held that the Commissioner (Appeals) had erred in not remanding the matter back to the proper officer for fresh decision/order as required by law. Additionally, it emphasized that circulars cannot override statutory provisions or judicial decisions and that the impugned instruction should not prejudice the department's rights. - The matter listed for final hearing on a specified date.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4800
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
