Authority rules B+G+31 service apartment is commercial building construction, not multi-storey residential for tax classification under RERA definitio...
Resale price method upheld for distribution; assessee's margins accepted and certain transfer-pricing adjustments deleted due to documented reimbursem...
Page of 4826
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
9821 to 9840 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" ?
The HC allowed the appeal in part: it affirmed the CESTAT's decision to set aside revocation of the authorised courier's registration as disproportionate given acceptance and release of the goods, but set aside the CESTAT's reduction of penalties. The HC held penalties under Regulation 14 and s.117 operate independently and restored the original penalty(s) of Rs.50,000 as imposed by Revenue, finding the CESTAT erred in reducing and/or setting aside those penalties despite upholding non-revocation. Consequently, the revocation remains quashed, but the respondent (authorised courier) must pay the restored penalties.
The HC allowed the appeal in part: it affirmed the CESTAT's decision to set aside revocation of the authorised courier's registration as disproportionate given acceptance and release of the goods, but set aside the CESTAT's reduction of penalties. The HC held penalties under Regulation 14 and s.117 operate independently and restored the original penalty(s) of Rs.50,000 as imposed by Revenue, finding the CESTAT erred in reducing and/or setting aside those penalties despite upholding non-revocation. Consequently, the revocation remains quashed, but the respondent (authorised courier) must pay the restored penalties.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4826 
Join Channel 
