Patent-settlement expenditure treated as commercially expedient revenue outlay, with foreign-law restrictions inapplicable before the prospective amen...
International transaction benchmarking restricts transfer pricing adjustments to associated-enterprise dealings, while functional comparability govern...
The CESTAT allowed the appeal in part. It held that DRI officers are competent to issue show-cause notices under Section 75 read with the relevant rules in drawback matters - the appellant's challenge to DRI jurisdiction was rejected. However, the penalty imposed on the appellant CHA/CB under Sections 114 and 117 was set aside: the allegations related to CHALR-regulated dereliction of CHA duties and did not establish abetment, collusion or wrongful involvement warranting statutory penal provisions; disciplinary remedies under CHALR prevail. Consequential orders imposing monetary penalty under Sections 114/117 were quashed and the appeal disposed of.
The CESTAT allowed the appeal in part. It held that DRI officers are competent to issue show-cause notices under Section 75 read with the relevant rules in drawback matters - the appellant's challenge to DRI jurisdiction was rejected. However, the penalty imposed on the appellant CHA/CB under Sections 114 and 117 was set aside: the allegations related to CHALR-regulated dereliction of CHA duties and did not establish abetment, collusion or wrongful involvement warranting statutory penal provisions; disciplinary remedies under CHALR prevail. Consequential orders imposing monetary penalty under Sections 114/117 were quashed and the appeal disposed of.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4784
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
