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 ...
Mutual fund maturity rules require proper rollover, redemption, disclosure, and due diligence; investor gains cannot excuse regulatory breaches or pen...
Goods classified as 'Zero Air' cleared by appellant from December 2002 to June 2007 were classifiable under Chapter Heading 2804 attracting 16% duty, not under Chapter Heading 2851 as compressed air attracting NIL duty. Evidence showed 'Zero Air' contained 78% Nitrogen, 20.8% Oxygen, 1.2% Argon, different from compressed air composition. It was used in Gas Chromatograph testing where compressed air cannot substitute. Classifying it as compressed air involved suppression of facts, justifying extended period invocation. From July 2007, appellant discharged duty classifying it under Chapter Heading 2804. Appeal against confirmed order rejected, upholding classification under Chapter Heading 2804 attracting 16% duty.
Goods classified as 'Zero Air' cleared by appellant from December 2002 to June 2007 were classifiable under Chapter Heading 2804 attracting 16% duty, not under Chapter Heading 2851 as compressed air attracting NIL duty. Evidence showed 'Zero Air' contained 78% Nitrogen, 20.8% Oxygen, 1.2% Argon, different from compressed air composition. It was used in Gas Chromatograph testing where compressed air cannot substitute. Classifying it as compressed air involved suppression of facts, justifying extended period invocation. From July 2007, appellant discharged duty classifying it under Chapter Heading 2804. Appeal against confirmed order rejected, upholding classification under Chapter Heading 2804 attracting 16% duty.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.