PMLA anticipatory bail requires satisfaction of twin conditions, while predicate-offence protection does not extend to independent money-laundering pr...
School-affiliation charges remain taxable where not directly connected with examinations, while extended limitation requires proof of deliberate tax e...
Concessional penalty for search-disclosed unreconciled jewellery applies where substantive disclosure conditions are met despite omission from origina...
Page of 4826
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1 to 20 of 96510 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
CESTAT allowed the appeal, setting aside the Principal Commissioner's order and restoring the classification and declared valuation. The Tribunal held that the Principal Commissioner unlawfully reclassified LED continuous lighting equipment from CTH 9006 to CTH 9405 despite prior appellate and adjudicatory orders in respect of identical products accepted by the Department; divergent treatment of remaining Bills of Entry was impermissible. A revised statement under s.108 Customs Act was held inadmissible absent appropriate witness examination and opportunity for cross-examination, and subsequent reliance on a post-date price list and an ex parte market survey was rejected. The CA certificate supporting the declared value was retained, and the rejection and re-determination under Valuation Rules were quashed.
CESTAT allowed the appeal, setting aside the Principal Commissioner's order and restoring the classification and declared valuation. The Tribunal held that the Principal Commissioner unlawfully reclassified LED continuous lighting equipment from CTH 9006 to CTH 9405 despite prior appellate and adjudicatory orders in respect of identical products accepted by the Department; divergent treatment of remaining Bills of Entry was impermissible. A revised statement under s.108 Customs Act was held inadmissible absent appropriate witness examination and opportunity for cross-examination, and subsequent reliance on a post-date price list and an ex parte market survey was rejected. The CA certificate supporting the declared value was retained, and the rejection and re-determination under Valuation Rules were quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.