Toy balloon tariff classification: functional heading prevails over residual rubber and festive article headings, supporting penalties for deliberate ...
Customs valuation using comparable contemporaneous imports can displace declared value, while missing speaking orders require pursuit before competent...
Foreign customs declarations and importer admissions established undervaluation, supporting sequential value redetermination, differential duty, and m...
Customs seizure safeguards prevent detention-based limitation avoidance and invalidate provisional release conditions for imported vehicles under an i...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
361 to 380 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" ?
Discount/margins retained by stockists on distribution of goods were held not to be "commission or brokerage" because the arrangement was principal-to-principal: invoices evidenced outright sales with applicable indirect tax, stockists bore inventory risk, had limited regulatory-compliance controls only, and independently recorded purchases/sales and offered profits to tax; further, the payer received sale consideration and did not make any commission payment, hence no TDS obligation under s.194H and no default under ss.201/201(1A). ESOP taxation arose only on exercise/allotment under s.17(2)(vi) and not at mere grant, so no TDS under s.192 and the demand was deleted. Interest for delayed payment to MSME suppliers was treated as part of sale consideration (not "interest" u/s 2(28A)) and, with voluntary disallowance u/s 37(1), s.194A and consequential ss.201/201(1A) were held inapplicable. - ITAT
Discount/margins retained by stockists on distribution of goods were held not to be "commission or brokerage" because the arrangement was principal-to-principal: invoices evidenced outright sales with applicable indirect tax, stockists bore inventory risk, had limited regulatory-compliance controls only, and independently recorded purchases/sales and offered profits to tax; further, the payer received sale consideration and did not make any commission payment, hence no TDS obligation under s.194H and no default under ss.201/201(1A). ESOP taxation arose only on exercise/allotment under s.17(2)(vi) and not at mere grant, so no TDS under s.192 and the demand was deleted. Interest for delayed payment to MSME suppliers was treated as part of sale consideration (not "interest" u/s 2(28A)) and, with voluntary disallowance u/s 37(1), s.194A and consequential ss.201/201(1A) were held inapplicable. - ITAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.