Pre-amendment reassessment limitation bars late notices under the preserved regime, invalidating consequential reassessment for affected earlier asses...
Cash-sales explanations for bank deposits require documentary reconciliation; reassessment notice survived where effective response time was available...
Functional comparability in transfer pricing prevents ad hoc arm's length adjustments where functions, assets, risks and reliable comparables are unes...
Contingency expenses, exempt-income disallowance, and royalty benchmarking: unsupported adjustments were deleted under consistent accounting and trans...
Page of 4921
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
81 to 100 of 98414 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 was not liable to pay anti-dumping duty on aluminum alloy wheels imported during the relevant period, as there was no conclusive evidence of mis-declaration of country of origin or evasion of duty. The investigation revealed no imports from the alleged Taiwanese supplier for the consignments in question, and the certificate of origin suspected to be forged did not pertain to the appellant's imports. Furthermore, the assessments for the relevant bills of entry had been finalized within the statutory limitation period under Section 17(4) of the Customs Act, 1962, precluding reassessment. Consequently, the Tribunal found insufficient evidence to establish that the goods originated from China or were routed through Taiwan to evade anti-dumping duty. The impugned order imposing anti-dumping duty was therefore set aside, and the appeal was allowed.
The CESTAT held that the appellant was not liable to pay anti-dumping duty on aluminum alloy wheels imported during the relevant period, as there was no conclusive evidence of mis-declaration of country of origin or evasion of duty. The investigation revealed no imports from the alleged Taiwanese supplier for the consignments in question, and the certificate of origin suspected to be forged did not pertain to the appellant's imports. Furthermore, the assessments for the relevant bills of entry had been finalized within the statutory limitation period under Section 17(4) of the Customs Act, 1962, precluding reassessment. Consequently, the Tribunal found insufficient evidence to establish that the goods originated from China or were routed through Taiwan to evade anti-dumping duty. The impugned order imposing anti-dumping duty was therefore set aside, and the appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4921 
