Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
Appellant imported goods from Malaysia and claimed preferential...
Imported goods from Malaysia, claimed preferential duty under Indo-ASEAN FTA. Revenue alleged Chinese origin. Court upheld Malaysian origin based on documents.
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
Appellant imported goods from Malaysia and claimed preferential duty under Indo-ASEAN FTA, declaring Malaysian origin. Revenue alleged goods were of Chinese origin routed through Malaysia to wrongly avail preferential duty. Held: Documentary evidence like invoices, certificates, and bills clearly showed Malaysian origin. Revenue relied on inadmissible statements without examining witnesses as required u/s 138B of Customs Act. Supplier in Malaysia did not claim Chinese origin. Oral evidence cannot override documentary evidence. Demands against appellant unsustainable, impugned order set aside, appeal allowed.
Appellant imported goods from Malaysia and claimed preferential duty under Indo-ASEAN FTA, declaring Malaysian origin. Revenue alleged goods were of Chinese origin routed through Malaysia to wrongly avail preferential duty. Held: Documentary evidence like invoices, certificates, and bills clearly showed Malaysian origin. Revenue relied on inadmissible statements without examining witnesses as required u/s 138B of Customs Act. Supplier in Malaysia did not claim Chinese origin. Oral evidence cannot override documentary evidence. Demands against appellant unsustainable, impugned order set aside, appeal allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.