Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
Transfer pricing margin adjustments require matching treatment of non-operating income and related costs, with comparability issues reconsidered on ev...
Preliminary-expense amortisation and MAT exempt-income adjustments prevailed, while trademark costs and managerial remuneration require fresh verifica...
Export valuation requires contemporaneous evidence; unrelated invoices cannot prove overvaluation, and dual penalties on firm and partner are impermis...
Ratification of resignation acceptance validates separation retrospectively, while withdrawal may be refused through reasoned administrative discretio...
Nature-dependent electricity contracts receive new Ind AS accounting, hedge designation, transition and financial-statement disclosure requirements fr...
Amendment in the bills of entry u/s 149 of the Customs Act, 1962 (CA ’62) - refund of excess duty paid - Re-classifying the goods by changing the CTH - The Tribunal noted that the Assistant Commissioner’s rejection letter was ambiguous and lacked substantive reasoning, which the Commissioner (Appeals) failed to rectify. It emphasized the need for a proper order, following principles of natural justice. - The Tribunal disagreed with the lower authorities' interpretation that amendments under Section 149 are impermissible post-clearance for changes impacting duty assessment. It pointed to higher judicial rulings that allowed such amendments where documentary evidence existed. - Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the previous order and remanded the case back for reassessment under the correct CTH.
Amendment in the bills of entry u/s 149 of the Customs Act, 1962 (CA ’62) - refund of excess duty paid - Re-classifying the goods by changing the CTH - The Tribunal noted that the Assistant Commissioner’s rejection letter was ambiguous and lacked substantive reasoning, which the Commissioner (Appeals) failed to rectify. It emphasized the need for a proper order, following principles of natural justice. - The Tribunal disagreed with the lower authorities' interpretation that amendments under Section 149 are impermissible post-clearance for changes impacting duty assessment. It pointed to higher judicial rulings that allowed such amendments where documentary evidence existed. - Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the previous order and remanded the case back for reassessment under the correct CTH.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4826 
Join Channel 
