Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Customs relief for Strait of Hormuz maritime disruptions remains available, with existing conditions continuing unchanged through the extended validit...
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.