Authentication of paper assessment orders upheld, while qualifying repairs, consumables and vendor advance write-offs remain deductible business claim...
Transaction value cannot be rejected solely on non-statutory valuation guidelines without corroborative evidence supporting reassessment of final cust...
Cross-examination rights and corroborated evidence limit customs penalties for misdeclaration in genuine import transactions involving documented clea...
Tariff classification of vehicle gear components follows the specific gearing entry, displacing motor-vehicle parts classification and related liabili...
Petitioner challenged assessment orders citing lack of jurisdiction, as entire duty liability was discharged from ITC availed at import. Court rejected jurisdiction challenge based on precedent, holding respondent competent to pass order under circular and GST Act provisions. However, petitioner failed to provide proper reply with tabulations and documents when show cause notice issued. Court set aside impugned order, remitting case for fresh order on merits, subject to petitioner depositing 10% of balance amount excluding defect relating to 100% ITC adjustment, and 1% of tax liability u/s 86(b) of GST Rules within 30 days. Petition allowed.
Petitioner challenged assessment orders citing lack of jurisdiction, as entire duty liability was discharged from ITC availed at import. Court rejected jurisdiction challenge based on precedent, holding respondent competent to pass order under circular and GST Act provisions. However, petitioner failed to provide proper reply with tabulations and documents when show cause notice issued. Court set aside impugned order, remitting case for fresh order on merits, subject to petitioner depositing 10% of balance amount excluding defect relating to 100% ITC adjustment, and 1% of tax liability u/s 86(b) of GST Rules within 30 days. Petition allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4788
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
