Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
CESTAT set aside the impugned order insofar as it held that royalty payments to a foreign related entity were includible in the transaction value of imported components under rule 10(1)(c) of the 2007 Valuation Rules. The Tribunal concluded the royalty related to domestically manufactured finished goods, was not a condition of sale of the imported goods, and therefore could not be added to assessable value; consequential imposition of penalty under s.114A of the Customs Act was unsustainable. The Tribunal further held the extended period of limitation could not be invoked because there was no evidence of suppression of facts with intent to evade duty. The appeal was allowed and the impugned order set aside.
CESTAT set aside the impugned order insofar as it held that royalty payments to a foreign related entity were includible in the transaction value of imported components under rule 10(1)(c) of the 2007 Valuation Rules. The Tribunal concluded the royalty related to domestically manufactured finished goods, was not a condition of sale of the imported goods, and therefore could not be added to assessable value; consequential imposition of penalty under s.114A of the Customs Act was unsustainable. The Tribunal further held the extended period of limitation could not be invoked because there was no evidence of suppression of facts with intent to evade duty. The appeal was allowed and the impugned order set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
