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...
Page of 4801
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
341 to 360 of 96001 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
AAAR affirmed that the product is classifiable under tariff item 38089340 as a plant growth regulator and attracts integrated tax at 18% (9% CGST + 9% SGST) under the referenced notification. The authority held that the appellant bears the onus of full disclosure in an advance ruling application and cannot rely on proprietary nondisclosure by its supplier to avoid that duty; alleged non-party status to prior disputes was immaterial, and submitted laboratory certificates undermined that claim. Challenges that the product is a fertilizer or a vegetable-origin enzyme were rejected for lack of probative evidence. The appellant's appeal is dismissed.
AAAR affirmed that the product is classifiable under tariff item 38089340 as a plant growth regulator and attracts integrated tax at 18% (9% CGST + 9% SGST) under the referenced notification. The authority held that the appellant bears the onus of full disclosure in an advance ruling application and cannot rely on proprietary nondisclosure by its supplier to avoid that duty; alleged non-party status to prior disputes was immaterial, and submitted laboratory certificates undermined that claim. Challenges that the product is a fertilizer or a vegetable-origin enzyme were rejected for lack of probative evidence. The appellant's appeal is dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.