Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
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...
CESTAT held that the appeal by the appellant against the designated authority's final findings dated 29.09.2022 and the consequential notification dated 27.12.2022 imposing definitive anti-dumping duty on semi-finished ophthalmic lenses from China PR is maintainable. The court found section 134 of the Finance Act, 2023 (which purportedly amended ss. 9A and 9C of the Customs Tariff Act) has not come into force because no notification under s. 1(2)(b) of the Finance Act has been issued; accordingly, the pre-existing jurisdiction under s. 9C of the Customs Tariff Act remains effective. The appeal is admitted and listed for hearing on 23.09.2025.
CESTAT held that the appeal by the appellant against the designated authority's final findings dated 29.09.2022 and the consequential notification dated 27.12.2022 imposing definitive anti-dumping duty on semi-finished ophthalmic lenses from China PR is maintainable. The court found section 134 of the Finance Act, 2023 (which purportedly amended ss. 9A and 9C of the Customs Tariff Act) has not come into force because no notification under s. 1(2)(b) of the Finance Act has been issued; accordingly, the pre-existing jurisdiction under s. 9C of the Customs Tariff Act remains effective. The appeal is admitted and listed for hearing on 23.09.2025.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
