Opportunity to furnish unsecured-loan confirmations is required before reassessment initiation; proceedings require fresh consideration after taxpayer...
Under-reporting on a first reassessment return attracts penalty, while enhanced misreporting penalty requires proof of a statutory misreporting catego...
CESTAT held that the impugned Commissioner (Appeals) order permitting depreciation on capital goods only until the date of payment of duty, instead of until the date of de-bonding/cessation of 100% EOU status, was unlawful. The Tribunal interpreted the notifications as permitting calculation of customs duty on depreciated value with reference to exchange rate at bill of entry and duty rate prevailing when the undertaking ceases to be an EOU, and that the specific provision allowing depreciation until payment applies only where clearance is authorized under Development Commissioner permission in normal debonding. The Commissioner (Appeals) order is set aside; the appeal is allowed and remanded to the adjudicating authority solely for recalculation of duty accordingly.
CESTAT held that the impugned Commissioner (Appeals) order permitting depreciation on capital goods only until the date of payment of duty, instead of until the date of de-bonding/cessation of 100% EOU status, was unlawful. The Tribunal interpreted the notifications as permitting calculation of customs duty on depreciated value with reference to exchange rate at bill of entry and duty rate prevailing when the undertaking ceases to be an EOU, and that the specific provision allowing depreciation until payment applies only where clearance is authorized under Development Commissioner permission in normal debonding. The Commissioner (Appeals) order is set aside; the appeal is allowed and remanded to the adjudicating authority solely for recalculation of duty accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.