Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
The AT upheld the adjudication order regarding contravention of Section 5 of FEMA read with Rule 4 of FEMA (Current Account Transactions) Rules, 2000, for remitting royalty to overseas parties exceeding permissible limit of 5% on local sales. The respondents had filed CST returns and respective State Level Sales Tax Returns disclosing actual sale price for taxation purpose, duly considered by the adjudicating authority. The AT held that sale price only relates to consideration for transferring property in goods without abatement except as provided, rejecting the appellant's reliance on a case pertaining to calculation of net income and not net sale price. The AT was not convinced by the appellant's submissions in view of its observations.
The AT upheld the adjudication order regarding contravention of Section 5 of FEMA read with Rule 4 of FEMA (Current Account Transactions) Rules, 2000, for remitting royalty to overseas parties exceeding permissible limit of 5% on local sales. The respondents had filed CST returns and respective State Level Sales Tax Returns disclosing actual sale price for taxation purpose, duly considered by the adjudicating authority. The AT held that sale price only relates to consideration for transferring property in goods without abatement except as provided, rejecting the appellant's reliance on a case pertaining to calculation of net income and not net sale price. The AT was not convinced by the appellant's submissions in view of its observations.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4782
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
