Consultancy fees claimed as business expense-can tax disallowance rest on survey suspicion despite invoices, contracts and bank trail? Appeal dismisse...
AAR held that the applicant is not entitled to preferential customs duty under APTA for imports involving third-party invoicing. It found that the APTA Rules of Origin (Rules 2-6, 8) require originating status, direct consignment, and a valid Certificate of Origin, but contain no substantive provision authorizing third-country invoicing or third-country trade. The reference to "third-party trade" in the Certificate of Origin completion notes and administrative Instruction No. 23/2024 was treated as merely procedural and incapable of enlarging treaty-based benefits. Applying strict construction of taxing statutes, AAR ruled that, absent explicit treaty authorization, third-party invoicing cannot support APTA preferential duty.
AAR held that the applicant is not entitled to preferential customs duty under APTA for imports involving third-party invoicing. It found that the APTA Rules of Origin (Rules 2-6, 8) require originating status, direct consignment, and a valid Certificate of Origin, but contain no substantive provision authorizing third-country invoicing or third-country trade. The reference to "third-party trade" in the Certificate of Origin completion notes and administrative Instruction No. 23/2024 was treated as merely procedural and incapable of enlarging treaty-based benefits. Applying strict construction of taxing statutes, AAR ruled that, absent explicit treaty authorization, third-party invoicing cannot support APTA preferential duty.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4821 
Join Channel 
