Scope of intermediary status for data hosting services: tribunal finds provider not intermediary, services exported and not taxable, limited remand on...
CENVAT credit availability after omission of Rule 12B in textiles confirmed; late addendum to SCN introducing new grounds held time-barred and invalid...
Export of Wheat Flour and related products subject to online allocation, eligibility criteria, non-transferable six-month authorisations and reporting...
Straight-line lease rental accounting change results in penalty quashed where disclosed accounts and bona fide arguable accounting interpretation exis...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
7241 to 7260 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
CESTAT upheld reclassification of the imported goods as 100% polyester knitted cut fabric under CTI 6001 92 00 ("others - of man-made fibres"), rejecting classification as long pile fabric under CTI 6001 10 90. The consequential duty demand based on such reclassification was sustained. In view of substantial mis-declaration of quantity and nature of goods, and presence of undeclared items, confiscation under sections 111(l) and 111(m) of the Customs Act was affirmed. Penalties on the importer-firm and its main partner under sections 112, 114A and 114AA were also upheld. The impugned order was confirmed in entirety and both appeals were dismissed.
CESTAT upheld reclassification of the imported goods as 100% polyester knitted cut fabric under CTI 6001 92 00 ("others - of man-made fibres"), rejecting classification as long pile fabric under CTI 6001 10 90. The consequential duty demand based on such reclassification was sustained. In view of substantial mis-declaration of quantity and nature of goods, and presence of undeclared items, confiscation under sections 111(l) and 111(m) of the Customs Act was affirmed. Penalties on the importer-firm and its main partner under sections 112, 114A and 114AA were also upheld. The impugned order was confirmed in entirety and both appeals were dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.