Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
CESTAT held that royalty payments to a foreign entity for technology and trademark use should not be included in the assessable value of imported goods under Rule 10(1)(c). The tribunal found that the royalty was calculated based on CKD kit imports and was independent of the sale conditions. The First Appellate Authority's order was set aside due to lack of reasoned analysis, violating principles of natural justice. The royalty payment was deemed unrelated to the import transaction, thus not qualifying for inclusion in the dutiable value. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, rejecting the attempt to enhance the customs duty assessment.
CESTAT held that royalty payments to a foreign entity for technology and trademark use should not be included in the assessable value of imported goods under Rule 10(1)(c). The tribunal found that the royalty was calculated based on CKD kit imports and was independent of the sale conditions. The First Appellate Authority's order was set aside due to lack of reasoned analysis, violating principles of natural justice. The royalty payment was deemed unrelated to the import transaction, thus not qualifying for inclusion in the dutiable value. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, rejecting the attempt to enhance the customs duty assessment.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.