Opportunity to respond to jurisdictional reports is mandatory before customs settlement duty enhancement; connected applications require consistent ad...
Specific customs headings for scaffolding components prevail over general classification, invalidating misclassification proceedings and enabling with...
Liquidator appointment under Section 34 requires consideration of creditor recommendations, valid professional authorisation, and preservation of vali...
Challenge concerns taxability of ocean freight under the IGST reverse charge mechanism and rejection of a rectification application. The court found the Proper Officer erred in treating a Supreme Court decision as prospective where constitutional precedent requires judgments to operate retrospectively unless expressly prospective, and concluded the SC ruling that Notification 10/2017 is clarificatory (not altering the taxable person under reverse charge) governs earlier import transactions; therefore the impugned confirmation of IGST demand and the March 25, 2025 rejection of rectification could not be sustained and the rectification application was allowed.
Challenge concerns taxability of ocean freight under the IGST reverse charge mechanism and rejection of a rectification application. The court found the Proper Officer erred in treating a Supreme Court decision as prospective where constitutional precedent requires judgments to operate retrospectively unless expressly prospective, and concluded the SC ruling that Notification 10/2017 is clarificatory (not altering the taxable person under reverse charge) governs earlier import transactions; therefore the impugned confirmation of IGST demand and the March 25, 2025 rejection of rectification could not be sustained and the rectification application was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4788
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
