Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
Valuation of the seized goods - (i) Grey metal powder suspected to be Iridium, (ii) Grey metal powder suspected to be Ruthenium, (iii) Micro SD Memory cards, (iv) Stone beads ('Chaton') and (v) Branded watches - The adjudicating authority arrived at the valuation using various sources such as metal bulletins, NIDB data, purchase invoices, and website details. The Appellate Tribunal found the valuation to be appropriate except for Ruthenium, where it disagreed with the method used by the adjudicating authority. The Tribunal determined the value of Ruthenium at Rs. 3,00,000 per kg, which was within the range identified by the authority. Accordingly, the duty payable by the appellants was re-quantified based on the revised valuation.
Valuation of the seized goods - (i) Grey metal powder suspected to be Iridium, (ii) Grey metal powder suspected to be Ruthenium, (iii) Micro SD Memory cards, (iv) Stone beads ('Chaton') and (v) Branded watches - The adjudicating authority arrived at the valuation using various sources such as metal bulletins, NIDB data, purchase invoices, and website details. The Appellate Tribunal found the valuation to be appropriate except for Ruthenium, where it disagreed with the method used by the adjudicating authority. The Tribunal determined the value of Ruthenium at Rs. 3,00,000 per kg, which was within the range identified by the authority. Accordingly, the duty payable by the appellants was re-quantified based on the revised valuation.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
