Minimum Import Price restrictions for Black Pepper, Areca-nuts and Apples upheld; procedural laying failure not fatal, notifications to be placed befo...
Transaction value between related persons requires market-equivalent pricing; importer must prove declared value mirrors ordinary international trade ...
Classification of exported insecticides under export tariff affirmed; reclassification and related penalties set aside and MEIS scrip jurisdiction rec...
Misclassification between copra and dry coconut: customs recovery and re-valuation quashed for lack of prior licensing-authority invalidation, appeals...
Liability for non-remittance of TDS rests with those responsible for corporate affairs; petitioner may challenge assessment orders as based on the company's erroneous TDS declaration and is entitled to pursue the statutory appellate remedy under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, which must be followed rather than seeking Article 226 review. The Official Liquidator failed to consider the petitioner's representation; the court directed the Liquidator to consider instituting appeals and placed a temporary bar on precipitative recovery or prosecution until the representation is decided or the appeal period expires.
Liability for non-remittance of TDS rests with those responsible for corporate affairs; petitioner may challenge assessment orders as based on the company's erroneous TDS declaration and is entitled to pursue the statutory appellate remedy under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, which must be followed rather than seeking Article 226 review. The Official Liquidator failed to consider the petitioner's representation; the court directed the Liquidator to consider instituting appeals and placed a temporary bar on precipitative recovery or prosecution until the representation is decided or the appeal period expires.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.