Natural justice in insolvency-professional discipline requires disclosed material; notices based on extraneous material and ignored defences are vitia...
Development rights transfers treated as immovable property, while construction abatement applies and repeated non-payment permits extended service-tax...
CESTAT ruled on classification disputes for various mobile phone components. The Tribunal held that Receivers should be classified under CTH 85177090 as phone parts, not standalone audio equipment under CTH 8518. Microphones were denied exemption under N/N. 57/2017-Cus. Connectors qualified for exemption benefits and were classified under CTH 85369090. Various covers and assemblies (Rear Cover, Front Housing, Camera Lens etc.) were deemed eligible for exemption under N/N. 50/2017 and classified under CTH 85177090 as cellular phone parts. The Tribunal emphasized that parts integral to phone functionality should be classified as phone components rather than standalone devices. Extended period limitations were rejected where genuine interpretative issues existed, restricting demands to normal period with applicable interest.
CESTAT ruled on classification disputes for various mobile phone components. The Tribunal held that Receivers should be classified under CTH 85177090 as phone parts, not standalone audio equipment under CTH 8518. Microphones were denied exemption under N/N. 57/2017-Cus. Connectors qualified for exemption benefits and were classified under CTH 85369090. Various covers and assemblies (Rear Cover, Front Housing, Camera Lens etc.) were deemed eligible for exemption under N/N. 50/2017 and classified under CTH 85177090 as cellular phone parts. The Tribunal emphasized that parts integral to phone functionality should be classified as phone components rather than standalone devices. Extended period limitations were rejected where genuine interpretative issues existed, restricting demands to normal period with applicable interest.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.