Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
Imported flow meters, pressure transmitters, level transmitters, parts and accessories were classified under tariff headings 9032 8990 and 9032 9000 or 9026 of Customs Tariff Act, 1975. Assessing authority insisted on revising classification with duty implications. Importers challenged before appellate authority. No speaking order issued by assessing authority. Appellate authority offered justifications akin to dual-headed assessment. Appellate jurisdiction is to determine validity of justification for detriment. Correctness of classification by customs and excise authorities for finished/manufactured products differs from classification of parts and accessories derived from rival headings. Heading 9032 intended for autonomous calibrating and regulating equipment. Nature of goods not examined for conformity. Onus on authorities to comply with interpretation rules not discharged. Lack of determination on correctness of classification. Disputes to be adjudicated afresh by original authorities for proper determination. Impugned orders set aside, matters remanded for de novo proceedings. Appeal allowed by way of remand.
Imported flow meters, pressure transmitters, level transmitters, parts and accessories were classified under tariff headings 9032 8990 and 9032 9000 or 9026 of Customs Tariff Act, 1975. Assessing authority insisted on revising classification with duty implications. Importers challenged before appellate authority. No speaking order issued by assessing authority. Appellate authority offered justifications akin to dual-headed assessment. Appellate jurisdiction is to determine validity of justification for detriment. Correctness of classification by customs and excise authorities for finished/manufactured products differs from classification of parts and accessories derived from rival headings. Heading 9032 intended for autonomous calibrating and regulating equipment. Nature of goods not examined for conformity. Onus on authorities to comply with interpretation rules not discharged. Lack of determination on correctness of classification. Disputes to be adjudicated afresh by original authorities for proper determination. Impugned orders set aside, matters remanded for de novo proceedings. Appeal allowed by way of remand.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
