Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
Page of 4794
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
401 to 420 of 95875 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 held that the appellant satisfied all conditions prescribed for the export of brown basmati rice under the Foreign Trade Policy and that FSSAI standards do not mandatorily apply to such exports unless explicitly stipulated. The Revenue failed to produce statutory provisions or authoritative notifications to establish the applicability of FSSAI norms to the exported goods. Additionally, no evidence was presented showing rejection of the consignment by the importing country or diversion of goods. The reliance on a non-specialized laboratory report was insufficient to prove misdeclaration. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the adjudicating authority's order, quashing demands of confiscation, redemption fine, duty, and penalties, and allowed the appeal.
The CESTAT held that the appellant satisfied all conditions prescribed for the export of brown basmati rice under the Foreign Trade Policy and that FSSAI standards do not mandatorily apply to such exports unless explicitly stipulated. The Revenue failed to produce statutory provisions or authoritative notifications to establish the applicability of FSSAI norms to the exported goods. Additionally, no evidence was presented showing rejection of the consignment by the importing country or diversion of goods. The reliance on a non-specialized laboratory report was insufficient to prove misdeclaration. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the adjudicating authority's order, quashing demands of confiscation, redemption fine, duty, and penalties, and allowed the appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.