PMLA anticipatory bail requires satisfaction of twin conditions, while predicate-offence protection does not extend to independent money-laundering pr...
School-affiliation charges remain taxable where not directly connected with examinations, while extended limitation requires proof of deliberate tax e...
The case involved a dispute regarding the demand of differential duty u/s 28 of the Customs Act, 1962 for using a helicopter for NSOP (Charter) despite having a permit for NSOP (Passenger). The Tribunal held that the permit for NSOP (Passenger) can be used for charter services based on previous rulings. The definition of 'Private Aircraft' was clarified, stating that if an aircraft is used for remuneration, it is considered a public transport aircraft. The appellant's use of the helicopter for commercial flights fell under the category of 'Private Aircraft'. As the helicopter was used for non-scheduled (Passenger) services, there was no violation of the exemption notification. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed.
The case involved a dispute regarding the demand of differential duty u/s 28 of the Customs Act, 1962 for using a helicopter for NSOP (Charter) despite having a permit for NSOP (Passenger). The Tribunal held that the permit for NSOP (Passenger) can be used for charter services based on previous rulings. The definition of 'Private Aircraft' was clarified, stating that if an aircraft is used for remuneration, it is considered a public transport aircraft. The appellant's use of the helicopter for commercial flights fell under the category of 'Private Aircraft'. As the helicopter was used for non-scheduled (Passenger) services, there was no violation of the exemption notification. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
