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...
The case pertains to the determination of whether the process undertaken by the appellant, a job worker, amounts to manufacture and the consequent duty liability. It was held that the process of populating PCBs by the appellant constituted manufacture as it transformed the raw materials into a new and distinct product. Regarding duty liability, it was ruled that the appellant, being the job worker, was rightly demanded duty since the conditions for clearance on a principal-to-principal basis were not satisfied. However, the demand was limited to the normal period due to the delay in issuing the show cause notice. The appellant's claim of exemption or duty payment by the raw material suppliers was remanded for verification of supporting documents. Penalties were set aside, and the matter was remanded for re-quantification of demand based on the observations made.
The case pertains to the determination of whether the process undertaken by the appellant, a job worker, amounts to manufacture and the consequent duty liability. It was held that the process of populating PCBs by the appellant constituted manufacture as it transformed the raw materials into a new and distinct product. Regarding duty liability, it was ruled that the appellant, being the job worker, was rightly demanded duty since the conditions for clearance on a principal-to-principal basis were not satisfied. However, the demand was limited to the normal period due to the delay in issuing the show cause notice. The appellant's claim of exemption or duty payment by the raw material suppliers was remanded for verification of supporting documents. Penalties were set aside, and the matter was remanded for re-quantification of demand based on the observations made.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.