Person chargeable with duty must be the importer at importation; subsequent purchasers cannot be held liable where beneficial owner rules did not appl...
The ITAT rectified its earlier appellate order under the mistake apparent from record doctrine by correcting the recorded basis for relief on corporate guarantee fee and MEIS export incentives. For the corporate guarantee issue, the correction clarified that non-interference rested on earlier-year acceptance by the TPO/AO at arm's length and absence of any change in facts, rather than on coordinate Bench rulings. For MEIS incentives, the order was amended to reflect reliance on Chennai, Delhi and Mumbai ITAT decisions and the Commissioner (Appeals)'s earlier-year orders. The miscellaneous application was allowed, and the substantive outcome remained unchanged.
The ITAT rectified its earlier appellate order under the mistake apparent from record doctrine by correcting the recorded basis for relief on corporate guarantee fee and MEIS export incentives. For the corporate guarantee issue, the correction clarified that non-interference rested on earlier-year acceptance by the TPO/AO at arm's length and absence of any change in facts, rather than on coordinate Bench rulings. For MEIS incentives, the order was amended to reflect reliance on Chennai, Delhi and Mumbai ITAT decisions and the Commissioner (Appeals)'s earlier-year orders. The miscellaneous application was allowed, and the substantive outcome remained unchanged.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4807 
Join Channel 
