Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
CESTAT held that para 3.16.2 of the Foreign Trade Policy bars SHIS only where the status holder has availed TUFS for exports made in the same year. The appellant had not claimed SHIS on the basis of its own exports; it was only a transferee holder of SHIS scrips originally issued to others, and it used those scrips later for duty payment on imported capital goods. The Tribunal also held that Notification No. 104/2009-Cus permitted drawback or Cenvat credit of additional duty debited in the scrip, and no bar applied to a transferee holder. The demand of wrongly availed Cenvat credit, interest and penalty was set aside.
CESTAT held that para 3.16.2 of the Foreign Trade Policy bars SHIS only where the status holder has availed TUFS for exports made in the same year. The appellant had not claimed SHIS on the basis of its own exports; it was only a transferee holder of SHIS scrips originally issued to others, and it used those scrips later for duty payment on imported capital goods. The Tribunal also held that Notification No. 104/2009-Cus permitted drawback or Cenvat credit of additional duty debited in the scrip, and no bar applied to a transferee holder. The demand of wrongly availed Cenvat credit, interest and penalty was set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4830 
Join Channel 
