Patent-settlement expenditure treated as commercially expedient revenue outlay, with foreign-law restrictions inapplicable before the prospective amen...
International transaction benchmarking restricts transfer pricing adjustments to associated-enterprise dealings, while functional comparability govern...
Page of 4794
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
321 to 340 of 95875 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The High Court held that u/ss 28AA(1) and 28(10) of the Customs Act, there is no requirement for a demand for interest to be made in the original assessment order. Interest liability arises automatically if the duty demand raised u/s 28 is not paid within the specified time. The court rejected the petitioner's contention that interest cannot be demanded when there is no mention of it in the assessment order. The respondents raised the interest demand within three months of the duty demand, which was not paid, and therefore the demand for interest was valid and not time-barred. The petitioner's factory was rightly not released due to the pending interest liability.
The High Court held that u/ss 28AA(1) and 28(10) of the Customs Act, there is no requirement for a demand for interest to be made in the original assessment order. Interest liability arises automatically if the duty demand raised u/s 28 is not paid within the specified time. The court rejected the petitioner's contention that interest cannot be demanded when there is no mention of it in the assessment order. The respondents raised the interest demand within three months of the duty demand, which was not paid, and therefore the demand for interest was valid and not time-barred. The petitioner's factory was rightly not released due to the pending interest liability.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4794
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
