Certificate-of-origin verification procedure governs preferential customs benefits; denial without retroactive verification was set aside with consequ...
Disciplinary Committee jurisdiction and mandatory investigation requirements invalidated cancellation of an insolvency professional's registration and...
Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Reverse Charge (RCM) - Commissions paid to a foreign service provider - benefit of exemption under notification no. 18/2009-ST - non-discloser of detailed in the Shipping Bill - The CESTAT noted that the appellant's compliance with the procedural aspects of the notification, albeit delayed, was recognized. - The appellant successfully argued for the benefit of an exemption notification, although initially failing to meet some procedural requirements. The Tribunal's decision pivoted on the finding that there was no deliberate suppression of facts by the appellant, which is a necessary condition for extending the limitation period for tax demands.
Reverse Charge (RCM) - Commissions paid to a foreign service provider - benefit of exemption under notification no. 18/2009-ST - non-discloser of detailed in the Shipping Bill - The CESTAT noted that the appellant's compliance with the procedural aspects of the notification, albeit delayed, was recognized. - The appellant successfully argued for the benefit of an exemption notification, although initially failing to meet some procedural requirements. The Tribunal's decision pivoted on the finding that there was no deliberate suppression of facts by the appellant, which is a necessary condition for extending the limitation period for tax demands.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
