Transfer-pricing comparability permits fresh objections and filters where software service comparables are functionally unsuitable for arm's-length pr...
Territorial rendering requirement excludes China-based management and consultancy services from fees for technical services under the India-China DTAA...
FEMA borrowing restrictions bind charitable trusts, and civil penalties apply without proving intent for delayed repayment of non-resident rupee loans...
The case pertains to confiscation and redemption of goods, levy of penalty u/s 114A of the Customs Act, and determination of capacity of suction pumps and excess quantity of non-textured fabric. The key points are: the burden of proof lies on the department to establish that the declared capacity of pumps is incorrect; the appellant's declared value should be accepted as the department failed to provide evidence against it. The appellant does not dispute the excess quantity of non-textured fabric and has paid duty on it. Section 28 can only be invoked after goods are cleared for home consumption. The reassessment done by the Additional Commissioner is u/s 17, not Section 28, rendering Sections 28AA and 114A inapplicable. Confiscation of goods is discretionary u/s 111, and in this case, no sufficient ground exists for confiscation. The Appellate Tribunal upheld the demand for duty on excess quantity but set aside the rest of the order, allowing the appeal in part.
The case pertains to confiscation and redemption of goods, levy of penalty u/s 114A of the Customs Act, and determination of capacity of suction pumps and excess quantity of non-textured fabric. The key points are: the burden of proof lies on the department to establish that the declared capacity of pumps is incorrect; the appellant's declared value should be accepted as the department failed to provide evidence against it. The appellant does not dispute the excess quantity of non-textured fabric and has paid duty on it. Section 28 can only be invoked after goods are cleared for home consumption. The reassessment done by the Additional Commissioner is u/s 17, not Section 28, rendering Sections 28AA and 114A inapplicable. Confiscation of goods is discretionary u/s 111, and in this case, no sufficient ground exists for confiscation. The Appellate Tribunal upheld the demand for duty on excess quantity but set aside the rest of the order, allowing the appeal in part.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4881 
