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 4823
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
7141 to 7160 of 96456 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Delayed adjudication under s. 28(9) of the Customs Act was challenged on the ground that the extension order for deciding the SCN was not communicated, in a dispute over denial of preferential duty exemption based on Certificates of Origin under the ASEAN-India FTA. The Court held that, unlike s. 110(2), s. 28 does not mandate prior intimation or communication of an extension; while intimation is desirable, non-communication is not fatal. Given the failure to file any substantive reply on merits to rebut the verification email questioning the Certificates of Origin, no ground for writ interference was made out; the petitioner was relegated to the statutory appeal with time to file it. - HC
Delayed adjudication under s. 28(9) of the Customs Act was challenged on the ground that the extension order for deciding the SCN was not communicated, in a dispute over denial of preferential duty exemption based on Certificates of Origin under the ASEAN-India FTA. The Court held that, unlike s. 110(2), s. 28 does not mandate prior intimation or communication of an extension; while intimation is desirable, non-communication is not fatal. Given the failure to file any substantive reply on merits to rebut the verification email questioning the Certificates of Origin, no ground for writ interference was made out; the petitioner was relegated to the statutory appeal with time to file it. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.