Revenue authority mandates using scheme-specific reversal procedures, not revising original entries, for instrument-based trade/customs benefits effec...
Transaction value under s.15(1) governs unrelated sales; valuation between related parties per Rule 28; consignment note required for unregistered rec...
The HC held that the impugned order refusing the stay application concerning demand/partial payment is cryptic and devoid of any application of mind to the specific grounds advanced by the applicant; accordingly the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remitted to the CIT (Exemption) for de novo consideration. The CIT (Exemption) is directed to frame and decide the stay application on the merits, dealing with each pleaded ground, and to pass a reasoned order in accordance with law within a reasonable time, preferably within four weeks from receipt of a copy of this order. Costs are left in the discretion of the remitting authority.
The HC held that the impugned order refusing the stay application concerning demand/partial payment is cryptic and devoid of any application of mind to the specific grounds advanced by the applicant; accordingly the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remitted to the CIT (Exemption) for de novo consideration. The CIT (Exemption) is directed to frame and decide the stay application on the merits, dealing with each pleaded ground, and to pass a reasoned order in accordance with law within a reasonable time, preferably within four weeks from receipt of a copy of this order. Costs are left in the discretion of the remitting authority.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.