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...
CESTAT ruled imported drawings and designs are correctly classifiable under CTH 49.06, not CTH 84.19. The tribunal determined these were original computer-printed drawings supplied separately from the ETP equipment, relating to post-import activities. The value should not be included in ETP's assessable value u/r 10(1)(b)(iv) of Customs Valuation Rules. The drawings qualified for duty exemption under Notification No. 12/2012-Cus at nil rate. Revenue's contention that drawings constituted pre-import activity was rejected. The Commissioner (Appeals) order was upheld and Revenue's appeal dismissed. The classification decision turned on the independent nature of the drawings rather than their connection to subsequently imported equipment.
CESTAT ruled imported drawings and designs are correctly classifiable under CTH 49.06, not CTH 84.19. The tribunal determined these were original computer-printed drawings supplied separately from the ETP equipment, relating to post-import activities. The value should not be included in ETP's assessable value u/r 10(1)(b)(iv) of Customs Valuation Rules. The drawings qualified for duty exemption under Notification No. 12/2012-Cus at nil rate. Revenue's contention that drawings constituted pre-import activity was rejected. The Commissioner (Appeals) order was upheld and Revenue's appeal dismissed. The classification decision turned on the independent nature of the drawings rather than their connection to subsequently imported equipment.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.