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...
The CESTAT dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction, holding that Section 129A(1) of the Customs Act, 1962, explicitly excludes the Tribunal's jurisdiction over matters relating to drawback under Chapter X. The statutory language contains a clear prohibition, twice emphasized in negative terms, that ousts the Tribunal's authority when Commissioner (Appeals) orders relate to drawback payments. The CESTAT followed binding precedent from the jurisdictional High Court which confirmed that "payment of drawback" in the proviso to Section 129A prevents the Tribunal from hearing cases involving drawback recovery. The concurrent jurisdiction between Revisionary Authority and the Tribunal in drawback matters was acknowledged as potentially perplexing for litigants.
The CESTAT dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction, holding that Section 129A(1) of the Customs Act, 1962, explicitly excludes the Tribunal's jurisdiction over matters relating to drawback under Chapter X. The statutory language contains a clear prohibition, twice emphasized in negative terms, that ousts the Tribunal's authority when Commissioner (Appeals) orders relate to drawback payments. The CESTAT followed binding precedent from the jurisdictional High Court which confirmed that "payment of drawback" in the proviso to Section 129A prevents the Tribunal from hearing cases involving drawback recovery. The concurrent jurisdiction between Revisionary Authority and the Tribunal in drawback matters was acknowledged as potentially perplexing for litigants.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
