Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
Validity of faceless assessment challenged due to non-compliance with Section 151A - notices issued by Joint Assessing Officer (JAO) instead of Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO). High Court held that JAO lacked jurisdiction to issue notices u/s 148, particularly in view of Section 151A read with Central Government notification dated 29 March 2022. Relying on Hexaware Technologies Ltd. case, the Court ruled the impugned notices illegal and invalid as JAO had no jurisdiction. Petition allowed in favor of assessee.
Validity of faceless assessment challenged due to non-compliance with Section 151A - notices issued by Joint Assessing Officer (JAO) instead of Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO). High Court held that JAO lacked jurisdiction to issue notices u/s 148, particularly in view of Section 151A read with Central Government notification dated 29 March 2022. Relying on Hexaware Technologies Ltd. case, the Court ruled the impugned notices illegal and invalid as JAO had no jurisdiction. Petition allowed in favor of assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
