Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
CESTAT held that the Board's 06.04.2016 circular is prospective and cannot be applied retrospectively; consequent demands of central excise duty based on retrospective application are unsustainable and are set aside. Products manufactured by the appellants were reclassified: certain micronutrient/bio-fertiliser products under CETH 3105/3101 and Plant Growth Regulators under CETH 3808 as per essential-character analysis; specific findings upheld for the impugned products. Demands of interest and penalties arising from the unsustainable duty demands were quashed. Personal penalty under Rule 26(1), CEX Rules, 2002 against the managing director was set aside for lack of mens rea. Deposits paid under protest are refundable subject to adjudication on unjust enrichment. Appeal disposed of.
CESTAT held that the Board's 06.04.2016 circular is prospective and cannot be applied retrospectively; consequent demands of central excise duty based on retrospective application are unsustainable and are set aside. Products manufactured by the appellants were reclassified: certain micronutrient/bio-fertiliser products under CETH 3105/3101 and Plant Growth Regulators under CETH 3808 as per essential-character analysis; specific findings upheld for the impugned products. Demands of interest and penalties arising from the unsustainable duty demands were quashed. Personal penalty under Rule 26(1), CEX Rules, 2002 against the managing director was set aside for lack of mens rea. Deposits paid under protest are refundable subject to adjudication on unjust enrichment. Appeal disposed of.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
