Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
Defined public benefit can retain charitable character; registration renewal requires examining genuine activities and legal compliance, not surplus a...
Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1481 to 1500 of 96333 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Declared transaction value could not be rejected merely because the discount appeared abnormal, where the importer produced invoices, purchase orders and Cisco communications supporting the higher discount, and the Revenue's comparative material was not examined for comparability. The Tribunal noted there was no allegation of relationship between the importer and supplier or of any payment over and above invoice price. Because the evidentiary record on both sides had not been properly considered, the rejection of value was unsustainable. The order was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh examination of the documents and redetermination of assessable value.
Declared transaction value could not be rejected merely because the discount appeared abnormal, where the importer produced invoices, purchase orders and Cisco communications supporting the higher discount, and the Revenue's comparative material was not examined for comparability. The Tribunal noted there was no allegation of relationship between the importer and supplier or of any payment over and above invoice price. Because the evidentiary record on both sides had not been properly considered, the rejection of value was unsustainable. The order was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh examination of the documents and redetermination of assessable value.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.