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 partially allowed the appeal by the Appellant. The Tribunal held that the warehousing period for the goods expired after 20.03.2020 and, in light of the national limitation extension during the COVID period, the prescribed warehousing period must be adjusted accordingly; consequently the Appellant's claim for remission of customs duty and interest in respect of the balance warehoused goods under s.23, Customs Act, 1962, is sustained and the denial in the impugned order set aside. The levy of duty under s.72(1)(d) is mitigated by remission for the specified goods. A general penalty under s.117 was confirmed but reduced in the interest of justice to Rs.25,000. Appeal allowed in part.
CESTAT partially allowed the appeal by the Appellant. The Tribunal held that the warehousing period for the goods expired after 20.03.2020 and, in light of the national limitation extension during the COVID period, the prescribed warehousing period must be adjusted accordingly; consequently the Appellant's claim for remission of customs duty and interest in respect of the balance warehoused goods under s.23, Customs Act, 1962, is sustained and the denial in the impugned order set aside. The levy of duty under s.72(1)(d) is mitigated by remission for the specified goods. A general penalty under s.117 was confirmed but reduced in the interest of justice to Rs.25,000. Appeal allowed in part.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
