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 set aside the impugned order, ruling that the failure to consider relevant judicial pronouncements and circulars while finalizing Shipping Bills constituted a clerical mistake/omission rectifiable under Section 154 of the Customs Act, 1962. Following precedent in Sesa Goa Limited [2010], the Tribunal held that the adjudicating authority's failure to take cognizance of the Supreme Court decision and Circular dated 17.02.2012 when determining 'Fe' content on DMT instead of WMT basis was an error arising from accidental omission. The authority must rectify this error under Section 154 and provide consequential benefits to the appellant by determining 'Fe' content on WMT basis in accordance with law.
The CESTAT set aside the impugned order, ruling that the failure to consider relevant judicial pronouncements and circulars while finalizing Shipping Bills constituted a clerical mistake/omission rectifiable under Section 154 of the Customs Act, 1962. Following precedent in Sesa Goa Limited [2010], the Tribunal held that the adjudicating authority's failure to take cognizance of the Supreme Court decision and Circular dated 17.02.2012 when determining 'Fe' content on DMT instead of WMT basis was an error arising from accidental omission. The authority must rectify this error under Section 154 and provide consequential benefits to the appellant by determining 'Fe' content on WMT basis in accordance with law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
