Independent manufacturing undertaking eligibility preserves Section 80IA/80IB deductions, while machinery kept ready for use qualifies for depreciatio...
Assessing Officer Satisfaction Requirement Bars Penalty for Cash Receipt in Immovable-Property Sale Cases Where Initiation Lacks Recorded Satisfaction...
Self-assessed import entries remain appealable, while bona fide classification disputes without misdeclaration cannot justify confiscation or penaltie...
Actual-user customs exemption conditions permit turnkey project transfers when imported windmill components are exclusively used for installation and ...
Customs offence disqualification excludes civil contraventions, preventing refusal of a private bonded warehouse licence based solely on monetary pena...
The Madras High Court considered the liability to pay Social Welfare Surcharge (SWS) and the use of MEIS/SEIS Scrips for discharging the same. The Court held that notifications u/s 25(1) of the Customs Act do not automatically grant exemption from all levies, requiring a deeper analysis of the notification's substance. Notifications Nos. 24 and 25 of 2015 were found to be limited to customs duty and do not exempt SWS. Debiting duty scrips was deemed a valid mode of discharging duty obligations u/r the Customs Act, contrary to the appellant's argument. The Court clarified that duty need not reach the Consolidated Fund of India for a levy to be valid. The Court upheld the original decision, dismissing the writ appeals.
The Madras High Court considered the liability to pay Social Welfare Surcharge (SWS) and the use of MEIS/SEIS Scrips for discharging the same. The Court held that notifications u/s 25(1) of the Customs Act do not automatically grant exemption from all levies, requiring a deeper analysis of the notification's substance. Notifications Nos. 24 and 25 of 2015 were found to be limited to customs duty and do not exempt SWS. Debiting duty scrips was deemed a valid mode of discharging duty obligations u/r the Customs Act, contrary to the appellant's argument. The Court clarified that duty need not reach the Consolidated Fund of India for a levy to be valid. The Court upheld the original decision, dismissing the writ appeals.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4891 
