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...
Misclassification between copra and dry coconut: customs recovery and re-valuation quashed for lack of prior licensing-authority invalidation, appeals...
Whether supply of electricity by the petitioner to an intermediary for onward supply outside India qualified as "export of goods" (zero-rated) for IGST refund was decided by construing Article 286(1)(b) and Sections 2(5) and 16 of the IGST Act. Since the petitioner had no privity of contract with the foreign buyer and title passed at the domestic delivery point from the petitioner to the intermediary, the petitioner's supply was only "for export" and not an export supply; consequently, it was a domestic supply and not eligible for zero-rated refund on that leg. The petitions were dismissed, with liberty to refile refund claims applying Rule 89 treating the intermediary supply as domestic. - HC
Whether supply of electricity by the petitioner to an intermediary for onward supply outside India qualified as "export of goods" (zero-rated) for IGST refund was decided by construing Article 286(1)(b) and Sections 2(5) and 16 of the IGST Act. Since the petitioner had no privity of contract with the foreign buyer and title passed at the domestic delivery point from the petitioner to the intermediary, the petitioner's supply was only "for export" and not an export supply; consequently, it was a domestic supply and not eligible for zero-rated refund on that leg. The petitions were dismissed, with liberty to refile refund claims applying Rule 89 treating the intermediary supply as domestic. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
