Alternative statutory remedy under GST bars writ challenge where classification, notice variance, and hearing disputes require factual appellate revie...
Duplicate PAN cancellation timeframe requires prior administrative representation before judicial intervention, ensuring a time-bound decision on the ...
Natural justice and pre-CIRP labour awards protect termination compensation, permitting withdrawal of court deposits despite later insolvency resoluti...
Arbitration of SEZ sub-lease monetary claims preserves rent, maintenance, termination, improvements and damages disputes while unused premises are vac...
Scientific research approval grants a research association tax recognition, subject to annual donor reporting, certification, and regulatory complianc...
Page of 4891
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
141 to 160 of 97820 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.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4891 
