Online bond platforms may offer overseas-regulated products and tax-specific bonds subject to disclosures, compliance safeguards and revised complianc...
Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
The High Court held that the respondent (DRI) had jurisdiction to issue the show cause notice under the Customs Act, 1962, following the Supreme Court's decision in Commissioner of Customs vs. Canon India Pvt. Ltd. The petition was disposed of by restoring the notice to the Adjudicating Authority for adjudication by a proper officer u/s 28 of the Customs Act, 1962.
The High Court held that the respondent (DRI) had jurisdiction to issue the show cause notice under the Customs Act, 1962, following the Supreme Court's decision in Commissioner of Customs vs. Canon India Pvt. Ltd. The petition was disposed of by restoring the notice to the Adjudicating Authority for adjudication by a proper officer u/s 28 of the Customs Act, 1962.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.