Defined public benefit can retain charitable character; registration renewal requires examining genuine activities and legal compliance, not surplus a...
Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
Transfer pricing and tax deductions upheld on established principles, while employee contributions and warranty provisions returned for fresh examinat...
Captive transfer pricing relies on industrial consumer tariffs, while genuine quotations can benchmark effluent treatment transfers under the Other Me...
Specific tariff classification for ophthalmic instruments and extended limitation principles determine the treatment of duty demands, confiscation, an...
Integrated golf function determines classification, placing launch monitors and simulators under other golf equipment rather than measuring instrument...
Page of 4796
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1081 to 1100 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" ?
CESTAT held that the imported animal feed supplement (Nutracor 88) was correctly classified under CTH 23099090, invalidating the appellant's original classification. The tribunal rejected the revenue's attempt to invoke extended limitation period, finding no suppression of facts or intentional mis-declaration. The court set aside the demands raised under extended limitation, redemption fine, and penalty under Section 114A of the Customs Act. The appellant was required to pay differential duty for the normal limitation period without additional penalties, effectively partially allowing the appeal while maintaining the revised tariff classification.
CESTAT held that the imported animal feed supplement (Nutracor 88) was correctly classified under CTH 23099090, invalidating the appellant's original classification. The tribunal rejected the revenue's attempt to invoke extended limitation period, finding no suppression of facts or intentional mis-declaration. The court set aside the demands raised under extended limitation, redemption fine, and penalty under Section 114A of the Customs Act. The appellant was required to pay differential duty for the normal limitation period without additional penalties, effectively partially allowing the appeal while maintaining the revised tariff classification.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4796
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
