Coercive recovery during GST searches is restrained pending scrutiny, preserving normal business operations and requiring adherence to investigation g...
COVID-19 limitation exclusion and destination-specific e-way bills govern revisional timelines and penalties for undocumented third-party plywood deli...
Questions arising from miscellaneous application orders cannot challenge unaltered Tribunal findings, leaving the original order separately challengea...
Transfer-pricing comparability filters require fresh arm's-length analysis, while delayed receivables need separate reconsideration with working-capit...
Page of 4894
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
721 to 740 of 97867 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Imported network interface cards/communication modules were classifiable as "parts" under CTI 8517 70 90, not as machines under CTI 8517 62 90, because an article is not a "part" only if it can perform an independent individual function on a standalone basis; here the goods could not communicate or achieve the intended transmission function unless slotted/assembled and configured with other components, akin to parts that are functionally inseparable from the host apparatus, so the reclassification demand failed. Invocation of the extended limitation period was unsustainable because mere self-assessment and an alleged revenue-motivated classification did not establish willful misstatement or suppression on the facts, so the demand was time-barred; the impugned order was set aside and the appeal allowed. - CESTAT
Imported network interface cards/communication modules were classifiable as "parts" under CTI 8517 70 90, not as machines under CTI 8517 62 90, because an article is not a "part" only if it can perform an independent individual function on a standalone basis; here the goods could not communicate or achieve the intended transmission function unless slotted/assembled and configured with other components, akin to parts that are functionally inseparable from the host apparatus, so the reclassification demand failed. Invocation of the extended limitation period was unsustainable because mere self-assessment and an alleged revenue-motivated classification did not establish willful misstatement or suppression on the facts, so the demand was time-barred; the impugned order was set aside and the appeal allowed. - CESTAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4894 
