Bogus donation receipts justified commission income assessment and defeated political-party tax exemption for inaccurate accounts and reporting failur...
Pure reimbursement without income element escapes tax withholding, while delayed withholding and unsupported provisions face deferred or renewed scrut...
Public benefit requirement defeats charitable registration where residents' association services are reciprocal, member-only facilities governed by mu...
Exempt-income expenditure disallowance is confined to investments that actually generated exempt income, while supported business expenses remain dedu...
Objective characteristics and principal use govern mining-tyre classification, while fresh advance ruling applications may rely on additional technica...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
801 to 820 of 96092 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The CESTAT Chandigarh addressed the maintainability of appeals below the monetary threshold limit set by CBIC circulars. The tribunal emphasized the binding nature of CBIC instructions on the department, citing Section 131BA of the Customs Act, 1962. The latest circular dated 02.11.2023 specified a monetary limit of Rs. 50 lakhs for filing appeals before the CESTAT. The tribunal noted that the appeals in question fell below this threshold and highlighted that previous appeals below the monetary limits had been consistently dismissed by higher courts. As the duty amount involved in each appeal was below the prescribed limit, the tribunal ruled the appeals as not maintainable based on the CBIC instructions, dismissing all 26 appeals.
The CESTAT Chandigarh addressed the maintainability of appeals below the monetary threshold limit set by CBIC circulars. The tribunal emphasized the binding nature of CBIC instructions on the department, citing Section 131BA of the Customs Act, 1962. The latest circular dated 02.11.2023 specified a monetary limit of Rs. 50 lakhs for filing appeals before the CESTAT. The tribunal noted that the appeals in question fell below this threshold and highlighted that previous appeals below the monetary limits had been consistently dismissed by higher courts. As the duty amount involved in each appeal was below the prescribed limit, the tribunal ruled the appeals as not maintainable based on the CBIC instructions, dismissing all 26 appeals.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.