Faceless reassessment jurisdiction turned on retrospective AO definition, with later faceless-assessment changes treated as clarificatory and procedur...
Page of 4807
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
2161 to 2180 of 96140 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The CESTAT upheld the appellant's classification of imported polished marble slabs under the relevant Customs Tariff Heading, entitling them to benefit under Notification No. 04/2006-CE. The Tribunal relied on a binding TRU circular clarifying the tariff classification, which was not contrary to statutory provisions or judicial interpretation. Citing Supreme Court precedents, the circular was deemed clarificatory and retrospective, mandating departmental compliance. Consequently, the Tribunal found no willful misstatement of facts and ruled that the denial of notification benefits was unjustified. The impugned order was quashed, and the appeal allowed, rendering ancillary issues such as interest and penalties moot.
The CESTAT upheld the appellant's classification of imported polished marble slabs under the relevant Customs Tariff Heading, entitling them to benefit under Notification No. 04/2006-CE. The Tribunal relied on a binding TRU circular clarifying the tariff classification, which was not contrary to statutory provisions or judicial interpretation. Citing Supreme Court precedents, the circular was deemed clarificatory and retrospective, mandating departmental compliance. Consequently, the Tribunal found no willful misstatement of facts and ruled that the denial of notification benefits was unjustified. The impugned order was quashed, and the appeal allowed, rendering ancillary issues such as interest and penalties moot.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4807 
Join Channel 
