ESOP expenditure allowed as FMV difference; long-term capital gain issue sent back for collector rate determination; deferred income additions disallo...
Appeal allowed; impugned order quashed as regulator failed to prove nexus or manipulative scheme; sale genuine - s.12A(a)-(c), Regs 3(a)-(d),4(1),4(2)...
Appellant's ring-back tone service held OIDAR, taxable domestically for 01.07.2012-31.07.2016; liability confirmed, penalties vacated, remanded for re...
The HC dismisses the Revenue's appeals and affirms the CESTAT's order. The CESTAT's factual findings that the impugned skin-barrier micropore surgical tapes are not within Notification No.21/2002-Cus are sustained, including reliance on additional material placed before the Tribunal. The Court holds the extended limitation under s.28(4) is not attracted absent proved collusion, willful misstatement or suppression, hence the show-cause notice could not cover the extended period; corresponding duty and penalty under s.114A are therefore not leviable. The Court declines to opine on a separate CESTAT bench decision and rejects the Revenue's challenge to the self-assessment finding for want of pleaded perversity. Appeals dismissed.
The HC dismisses the Revenue's appeals and affirms the CESTAT's order. The CESTAT's factual findings that the impugned skin-barrier micropore surgical tapes are not within Notification No.21/2002-Cus are sustained, including reliance on additional material placed before the Tribunal. The Court holds the extended limitation under s.28(4) is not attracted absent proved collusion, willful misstatement or suppression, hence the show-cause notice could not cover the extended period; corresponding duty and penalty under s.114A are therefore not leviable. The Court declines to opine on a separate CESTAT bench decision and rejects the Revenue's challenge to the self-assessment finding for want of pleaded perversity. Appeals dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4821 
Join Channel 
