Authentication of paper assessment orders upheld, while qualifying repairs, consumables and vendor advance write-offs remain deductible business claim...
Transaction value cannot be rejected solely on non-statutory valuation guidelines without corroborative evidence supporting reassessment of final cust...
Cross-examination rights and corroborated evidence limit customs penalties for misdeclaration in genuine import transactions involving documented clea...
Tariff classification of vehicle gear components follows the specific gearing entry, displacing motor-vehicle parts classification and related liabili...
Page of 4786
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
381 to 400 of 95715 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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.