Penny-stock additions require transaction-specific evidence; general investigation material alone cannot establish undisclosed income or accommodation...
Transfer pricing comparability prioritises reliable external CUPs and foreign-currency LIBOR benchmarks for exports, borrowings and delayed receivable...
Section 153C satisfaction and seized electronic records sustained unexplained-investment addition, subject to proportionate ownership-share verificati...
CESTAT allowed the appeal and held that the impugned mixed-cereal products are correctly classifiable under CETH 2106 as food preparations, rejecting the Revenue's reclassification to CETSH 1901. The Tribunal found the Revenue admitted the goods were mixed cereals but failed to establish they constituted "preparations of flours" derived from starch or malt extract or otherwise possessing the essential character required for Heading 1901; no evidentiary change of fact or law justified revising a long-accepted classification. The demands for differential excise duty and the penalty under Rule 25, CEX Rules 2002, premised on reclassification were unsustainable and set aside.
CESTAT allowed the appeal and held that the impugned mixed-cereal products are correctly classifiable under CETH 2106 as food preparations, rejecting the Revenue's reclassification to CETSH 1901. The Tribunal found the Revenue admitted the goods were mixed cereals but failed to establish they constituted "preparations of flours" derived from starch or malt extract or otherwise possessing the essential character required for Heading 1901; no evidentiary change of fact or law justified revising a long-accepted classification. The demands for differential excise duty and the penalty under Rule 25, CEX Rules 2002, premised on reclassification were unsustainable and set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
