Pre-amendment reassessment limitation bars late notices under the preserved regime, invalidating consequential reassessment for affected earlier asses...
Cash-sales explanations for bank deposits require documentary reconciliation; reassessment notice survived where effective response time was available...
Functional comparability in transfer pricing prevents ad hoc arm's length adjustments where functions, assets, risks and reliable comparables are unes...
CESTAT held that the imported in-vitro diagnostic reagents are correctly classifiable under CTI 3822 0019 as "other diagnostic reagents for medical diagnosis" and not under the residual entry CTI 3822 0090. The Tribunal found that N/N. 16/2019 and 17/2019 merely revised the rate of duty and did not alter the tariff description under heading 3822, rendering the contrary conclusion of the Commr (Appeals) factually and legally erroneous. Noting that the department had earlier accepted, on merits, an Order-in-Appeal classifying identical goods of the same appellant under CTI 3822 0019, CESTAT held that the department could not now adopt a contrary stand. The impugned order dated 20.07.2021 was set aside and the appeal was allowed.
CESTAT held that the imported in-vitro diagnostic reagents are correctly classifiable under CTI 3822 0019 as "other diagnostic reagents for medical diagnosis" and not under the residual entry CTI 3822 0090. The Tribunal found that N/N. 16/2019 and 17/2019 merely revised the rate of duty and did not alter the tariff description under heading 3822, rendering the contrary conclusion of the Commr (Appeals) factually and legally erroneous. Noting that the department had earlier accepted, on merits, an Order-in-Appeal classifying identical goods of the same appellant under CTI 3822 0019, CESTAT held that the department could not now adopt a contrary stand. The impugned order dated 20.07.2021 was set aside and the appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4918 
