Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
CESTAT allowed the appeal, setting aside the demand of IGST, interest and penalty arising from alleged short-payment on freight, insurance and landing charges for imports from Bhutan. The Tribunal found that, under the distributorship and FOR agreements, the invoice prices were on CIF/all-inclusive terms, covering transportation, insurance, loading and forwarding up to the buyer's destination. Certificates from the transporter and a clarification from the Bhutan supplier confirmed that no additional freight or insurance was charged to the appellant. Consequently, the allegation of non-inclusion of freight, insurance and landing cost in assessable value, as well as suppression or misstatement justifying penalty or extended limitation, was rejected.
CESTAT allowed the appeal, setting aside the demand of IGST, interest and penalty arising from alleged short-payment on freight, insurance and landing charges for imports from Bhutan. The Tribunal found that, under the distributorship and FOR agreements, the invoice prices were on CIF/all-inclusive terms, covering transportation, insurance, loading and forwarding up to the buyer's destination. Certificates from the transporter and a clarification from the Bhutan supplier confirmed that no additional freight or insurance was charged to the appellant. Consequently, the allegation of non-inclusion of freight, insurance and landing cost in assessable value, as well as suppression or misstatement justifying penalty or extended limitation, was rejected.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
