Appointment of Registrars as adjudicating officers under Companies Act reallocates territorial jurisdiction and sets appeal route to Regional Director...
Composite supply of drilling services and site specific chemicals characterised as composite supply; prior advance rulings set aside, tax rate left op...
Cross country pipeline classification and ITC entitlement: pipelines outside factory treated as immovable, ITC disallowed under Section 17 restriction...
Dominant issue: whether licence revocation, security forfeiture and penalty for alleged overvaluation to obtain ineligible drawback violated Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2018. Reasoning: findings rested on alleged breaches of regs 10(d) and 10(e) but the authority failed to address a 344-day lapse between initiation and submission of the enquiry report; precedent requires mandatory adherence to timelines absent a finding that delay was attributable to the broker. Outcome: impugned order set aside and appeal allowed for failure to uphold mandatory timelines and absent adequate findings on broker culpability. - CESTAT
Dominant issue: whether licence revocation, security forfeiture and penalty for alleged overvaluation to obtain ineligible drawback violated Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2018. Reasoning: findings rested on alleged breaches of regs 10(d) and 10(e) but the authority failed to address a 344-day lapse between initiation and submission of the enquiry report; precedent requires mandatory adherence to timelines absent a finding that delay was attributable to the broker. Outcome: impugned order set aside and appeal allowed for failure to uphold mandatory timelines and absent adequate findings on broker culpability. - CESTAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.