Authentication of paper assessment orders upheld, while qualifying repairs, consumables and vendor advance write-offs remain deductible business claim...
Transaction value cannot be rejected solely on non-statutory valuation guidelines without corroborative evidence supporting reassessment of final cust...
Cross-examination rights and corroborated evidence limit customs penalties for misdeclaration in genuine import transactions involving documented clea...
Tariff classification of vehicle gear components follows the specific gearing entry, displacing motor-vehicle parts classification and related liabili...
The dominant issue was whether the tax authority should be directed to act on a pending refund application and consider interest and penalty. The court held that the authority must decide the refund application in accordance with law, specifically taking into account the claim for refund along with applicable interest, and bearing in mind binding precedents on such refund claims. Consequently, the authority was directed to consider, process, and pass appropriate orders on the refund application within four months from receipt of the order, and the writ petition was disposed of. - HC
The dominant issue was whether the tax authority should be directed to act on a pending refund application and consider interest and penalty. The court held that the authority must decide the refund application in accordance with law, specifically taking into account the claim for refund along with applicable interest, and bearing in mind binding precedents on such refund claims. Consequently, the authority was directed to consider, process, and pass appropriate orders on the refund application within four months from receipt of the order, and the writ petition was disposed of. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.