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...
CESTAT affirms the classification of the goods as "paper biri" under subheading 2403.19.29 and dismisses the Revenue's appeal. The Tribunal held that packaging and labelling - including the explicit use of the term "bidi" on cartons and wrappers - demonstrate the Appellant's intention to market the product as bidi, not cigarette, and that chemical-examiner observations do not override the clear trade presentation and absence of market-enquiry evidence to the contrary. Relying on relevant High Court precedent, the Tribunal found no basis to reclassify the product as cigarette under subheading 2402.20.40, concluding there is no merit in the Revenue's grounds and upholding the impugned order.
CESTAT affirms the classification of the goods as "paper biri" under subheading 2403.19.29 and dismisses the Revenue's appeal. The Tribunal held that packaging and labelling - including the explicit use of the term "bidi" on cartons and wrappers - demonstrate the Appellant's intention to market the product as bidi, not cigarette, and that chemical-examiner observations do not override the clear trade presentation and absence of market-enquiry evidence to the contrary. Relying on relevant High Court precedent, the Tribunal found no basis to reclassify the product as cigarette under subheading 2402.20.40, concluding there is no merit in the Revenue's grounds and upholding the impugned order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
