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...
Notification No. 165/2003-Cus. dated 12.11.2003 excluded reflective glass from Anti-Dumping Duty (ADD), but Notification No. 6/2009 did not. Notification No. 51/2009 dated 22.05.2009 allowed exclusion of reflective glass from ADD. Between 06.01.2009 to 22.05.2009, there was no exemption for reflective glass from ADD. The imported goods being green and blue reflective glass, exemption was not available during this period. The contention that exemption continued from Notification 165/2003 till 51/2009 is untenable as 'reflective glass' was not covered by any Notification from 06.01.2009 to 22.05.2009. The Tribunal's decision is based on Supreme Court judgments in Dilip Kumar and State of Gujarat Vs. Arcelor Mittal Nippon Steel India Ltd. The appeal is not sustainable.
Notification No. 165/2003-Cus. dated 12.11.2003 excluded reflective glass from Anti-Dumping Duty (ADD), but Notification No. 6/2009 did not. Notification No. 51/2009 dated 22.05.2009 allowed exclusion of reflective glass from ADD. Between 06.01.2009 to 22.05.2009, there was no exemption for reflective glass from ADD. The imported goods being green and blue reflective glass, exemption was not available during this period. The contention that exemption continued from Notification 165/2003 till 51/2009 is untenable as 'reflective glass' was not covered by any Notification from 06.01.2009 to 22.05.2009. The Tribunal's decision is based on Supreme Court judgments in Dilip Kumar and State of Gujarat Vs. Arcelor Mittal Nippon Steel India Ltd. The appeal is not sustainable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
