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...
Necessary-party requirements limit impleadment of independent entities, while deferred consideration does not create an appealable adverse determinati...
Food supplement classification requires common parlance and authoritative tests, preventing treatment as proprietary Ayurvedic medicines without suppo...
Specified regulatory authority income receives conditional tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income character, and return f...
Tax exemption for regulatory authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-filing...
Page of 4796
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
601 to 620 of 95918 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The HC quashed the impugned order for violating principles of natural justice, as the authority failed to consider the petitioner's defense reply to the show cause notice regarding recovery of service tax with interest and penalty. The petitioner had claimed exemption under Mega exemption Notification 25/2012, but this defense was apparently "forgotten" by the adjudicating authority. The matter was remanded to the competent authority with directions to consider the petitioner's reply, provide an opportunity for hearing, and pass a fresh order in accordance with law. The application was allowed.
The HC quashed the impugned order for violating principles of natural justice, as the authority failed to consider the petitioner's defense reply to the show cause notice regarding recovery of service tax with interest and penalty. The petitioner had claimed exemption under Mega exemption Notification 25/2012, but this defense was apparently "forgotten" by the adjudicating authority. The matter was remanded to the competent authority with directions to consider the petitioner's reply, provide an opportunity for hearing, and pass a fresh order in accordance with law. The application was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4796
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
