Imported menthol-scented sweet supari classification dispute: seizure quashed, release for home consumption subject to duty bond; bank guarantee refus...
CKD/SKD air-conditioner components classifiable with finished units by essential character; prior advance ruling extended three years, FTA benefits po...
Scope of judicial review under Article 226: supervisory, not appellate; factual reappraisal barred, challenge dismissed; insolvency professional dutie...
An assessee-trust denied exemption under s.11 sought revision under s.264 against an order appealable under s.246A. The revisional authority could not refuse to exercise jurisdiction merely because an appellate remedy existed, since the statute does not mandate exhaustion of appeal where no appeal is filed; accordingly, rejection on that ground was unsustainable. Further, s.264 powers are wide and intended to prevent miscarriage of justice, enabling relief even where the assessee's own mistake in the return caused omission of a legitimate claim; Goetze (India) Ltd. was held inapplicable. The impugned order rejecting the s.264 application for AY 2016-17 was quashed and set aside. - HC
An assessee-trust denied exemption under s.11 sought revision under s.264 against an order appealable under s.246A. The revisional authority could not refuse to exercise jurisdiction merely because an appellate remedy existed, since the statute does not mandate exhaustion of appeal where no appeal is filed; accordingly, rejection on that ground was unsustainable. Further, s.264 powers are wide and intended to prevent miscarriage of justice, enabling relief even where the assessee's own mistake in the return caused omission of a legitimate claim; Goetze (India) Ltd. was held inapplicable. The impugned order rejecting the s.264 application for AY 2016-17 was quashed and set aside. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.