Authentication of paper assessment orders upheld, while qualifying repairs, consumables and vendor advance write-offs remain deductible business claim...
Transaction value cannot be rejected solely on non-statutory valuation guidelines without corroborative evidence supporting reassessment of final cust...
Cross-examination rights and corroborated evidence limit customs penalties for misdeclaration in genuine import transactions involving documented clea...
Page of 4782
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
301 to 320 of 95636 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
AT, in a profiteering matter concerning the period 15.11.2017 to 30.06.2019, held that interest at 18% under Rule 133(3)(c) of the CGST Rules was not leviable since the investigation period did not substantially fall within the operative period of that provision. AT further held that no penalty was imposable as the statutory provisions enabling penalty came into force only in 2020, subsequent to the last date of the alleged profiteering. The concerned Commissioner was directed to submit a compliance report within four months, and the appeal was disposed of.
AT, in a profiteering matter concerning the period 15.11.2017 to 30.06.2019, held that interest at 18% under Rule 133(3)(c) of the CGST Rules was not leviable since the investigation period did not substantially fall within the operative period of that provision. AT further held that no penalty was imposable as the statutory provisions enabling penalty came into force only in 2020, subsequent to the last date of the alleged profiteering. The concerned Commissioner was directed to submit a compliance report within four months, and the appeal was disposed of.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4782
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
