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 allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order, holding that advertisement and promotional expenses (APE) and management service fees (MSF) paid by the importer cannot be added to the transaction value under rule 10(1)(e) of the 2007 Valuation Rules or treated as a condition of sale under section 14(1) of the Customs Act. The Tribunal found APE were incurred on the importer's own account per rule 3(2)(b) and MSF constituted independent service consideration unconnected with import pricing. Consequently, differential duty, interest under section 28AA and penalty under section 114A could not be imposed, and invocation of extended limitation was unsustainable.
CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order, holding that advertisement and promotional expenses (APE) and management service fees (MSF) paid by the importer cannot be added to the transaction value under rule 10(1)(e) of the 2007 Valuation Rules or treated as a condition of sale under section 14(1) of the Customs Act. The Tribunal found APE were incurred on the importer's own account per rule 3(2)(b) and MSF constituted independent service consideration unconnected with import pricing. Consequently, differential duty, interest under section 28AA and penalty under section 114A could not be imposed, and invocation of extended limitation was unsustainable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
