Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
Freight and insurance were held includible in the assessable value under Rule 10(2) because the importer failed to produce clear documentary proof that the FOB price already covered transportation and insurance up to importation; oral assertion alone was insufficient, and the invoice terms supported the Revenue's case. However, the demand was barred by limitation because the importer had disclosed the invoiced value and the treatment of freight and insurance in the bill of entry and supporting documents, so suppression or wilful misstatement was not proved. The Tribunal applied the principle that suppression requires a positive, deliberate act and treated the dispute as revenue neutral, allowing the appeal on limitation and setting aside the duty, interest and penalty.
Freight and insurance were held includible in the assessable value under Rule 10(2) because the importer failed to produce clear documentary proof that the FOB price already covered transportation and insurance up to importation; oral assertion alone was insufficient, and the invoice terms supported the Revenue's case. However, the demand was barred by limitation because the importer had disclosed the invoiced value and the treatment of freight and insurance in the bill of entry and supporting documents, so suppression or wilful misstatement was not proved. The Tribunal applied the principle that suppression requires a positive, deliberate act and treated the dispute as revenue neutral, allowing the appeal on limitation and setting aside the duty, interest and penalty.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
