Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1201 to 1220 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" ?
Levy of additional customs duty under section 3(1) of the Customs Tariff Act, equivalent to rubber cess under section 12 of the Rubber Act on imported natural rubber, was upheld as legally sustainable. The Tribunal noted that competing decisions had been cited, but it followed the coordinate Bench ruling in the appellant's own case, which had recently rejected the same challenge for an earlier period by relying on the Larger Bench decision in TTK-LIG Ltd. In the absence of distinguishing facts and with no operative stay or interim order from the Supreme Court, the Tribunal declined to take a different view and sustained the demand; the appeal was dismissed.
Levy of additional customs duty under section 3(1) of the Customs Tariff Act, equivalent to rubber cess under section 12 of the Rubber Act on imported natural rubber, was upheld as legally sustainable. The Tribunal noted that competing decisions had been cited, but it followed the coordinate Bench ruling in the appellant's own case, which had recently rejected the same challenge for an earlier period by relying on the Larger Bench decision in TTK-LIG Ltd. In the absence of distinguishing facts and with no operative stay or interim order from the Supreme Court, the Tribunal declined to take a different view and sustained the demand; the appeal was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.