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...
Classification dispute for imported goods under Customs Tariff Act, 1975. Appellant declared details, goods physically examined. No wilful suppression of facts attributable for Section 28(4) applicability. Earlier, Customs authorities permitted clearance under appellant's classification. Commissioner held Section 28(4) invoking provisions inapplicable, being a case of misclassification only. Correct classification accepted, differential duty paid upon informing. Impugned order set aside by Appellate Tribunal, appeal allowed.
Classification dispute for imported goods under Customs Tariff Act, 1975. Appellant declared details, goods physically examined. No wilful suppression of facts attributable for Section 28(4) applicability. Earlier, Customs authorities permitted clearance under appellant's classification. Commissioner held Section 28(4) invoking provisions inapplicable, being a case of misclassification only. Correct classification accepted, differential duty paid upon informing. Impugned order set aside by Appellate Tribunal, appeal allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.