International transaction characterisation of domestic divestment of support services business rejected; transaction between resident associated enter...
Minimum Import Price restrictions for Black Pepper, Areca-nuts and Apples upheld; procedural laying failure not fatal, notifications to be placed befo...
Transaction value between related persons requires market-equivalent pricing; importer must prove declared value mirrors ordinary international trade ...
Classification of exported insecticides under export tariff affirmed; reclassification and related penalties set aside and MEIS scrip jurisdiction rec...
Challenge to a demand order for alleged fraudulent availment of ITC was rejected as the noticee failed to reply to the show cause notice despite being aware of the investigation, and personal hearing intimations sent to the registered email were held duly served, rendering the non-service plea false. Issuance of a consolidated show cause notice covering multiple financial years was held permissible, as analysis across "periods" can be necessary to establish a pattern of fraud. On adjudicatory jurisdiction, it was held that in multi-noticee matters jurisdiction lies with the commissionerate linked to the highest proposed demand, consistent with the relevant circular. Writ jurisdiction was declined given disputed facts and availability of statutory appeal; the petition was dismissed with exemplary costs. - HC
Challenge to a demand order for alleged fraudulent availment of ITC was rejected as the noticee failed to reply to the show cause notice despite being aware of the investigation, and personal hearing intimations sent to the registered email were held duly served, rendering the non-service plea false. Issuance of a consolidated show cause notice covering multiple financial years was held permissible, as analysis across "periods" can be necessary to establish a pattern of fraud. On adjudicatory jurisdiction, it was held that in multi-noticee matters jurisdiction lies with the commissionerate linked to the highest proposed demand, consistent with the relevant circular. Writ jurisdiction was declined given disputed facts and availability of statutory appeal; the petition was dismissed with exemplary costs. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.