Classification of imported salvaged shaft pieces as ship parts confirmed, reassessment time-barred and appeal allowed restoring original classificatio...
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...
Diversion of EPCG-imported capital goods to vendors' premises and non-endorsement of supporting manufacturers was held not to breach substantive EPCG conditions where there was no allegation of sale, transfer, or other impermissible disposal and the export obligation was stated to be fulfilled; DGFT's post facto approval for inclusion of supporting manufacturers bound Customs, and the remaining notification conditions were treated as compliance safeguards, so duty demand was unsustainable. Alleged misdeclaration under s.114AA failed as the notice did not establish any intentional false statement or document, so penalty was not imposable. Extended limitation was rejected because clearance under bond kept the obligation live, enabling issuance of notice upon non-production of discharge certificate, but the Revenue's appeal still failed on merits and was dismissed. - CESTAT
Diversion of EPCG-imported capital goods to vendors' premises and non-endorsement of supporting manufacturers was held not to breach substantive EPCG conditions where there was no allegation of sale, transfer, or other impermissible disposal and the export obligation was stated to be fulfilled; DGFT's post facto approval for inclusion of supporting manufacturers bound Customs, and the remaining notification conditions were treated as compliance safeguards, so duty demand was unsustainable. Alleged misdeclaration under s.114AA failed as the notice did not establish any intentional false statement or document, so penalty was not imposable. Extended limitation was rejected because clearance under bond kept the obligation live, enabling issuance of notice upon non-production of discharge certificate, but the Revenue's appeal still failed on merits and was dismissed. - CESTAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4824 
Join Channel 
