Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
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.