Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
The HC allowed the writ petition and held that, pursuant to the Principal Bench ruling, the tax authorities are entitled to exclude the period 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 when computing limitation under the relevant provisions, thereby entitling the petitioner to relief. Consequently, the impugned assessment order dated 16.08.2024 issued by the first respondent for the assessment year 2019-2020 is quashed. The matter is remitted to the first respondent for fresh adjudication on merits and in accordance with law, taking into account the exclusion of the specified period; no order as to costs.
The HC allowed the writ petition and held that, pursuant to the Principal Bench ruling, the tax authorities are entitled to exclude the period 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 when computing limitation under the relevant provisions, thereby entitling the petitioner to relief. Consequently, the impugned assessment order dated 16.08.2024 issued by the first respondent for the assessment year 2019-2020 is quashed. The matter is remitted to the first respondent for fresh adjudication on merits and in accordance with law, taking into account the exclusion of the specified period; no order as to costs.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.