Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
Merchant banker regulation consolidates registration, governance, capital, reporting, outsourcing and investor-protection requirements under an update...
Section 149 of the Customs Act governs amendment of shipping bills, and where the statute does not prescribe a limitation period, a departmental circular cannot impose a three-month bar to curtail that right. The Tribunal was therefore justified in rejecting the delay objection and permitting amendment. The Court also held that the mistaken entry of export scheme code was a clerical error, since DFIA applications, file numbers and shipping bills already reflected DFIA exports. On that record, the request was only to correct an inadvertent code error, not to effect a barred conversion of scheme, and the first proviso to Section 149 did not apply. The Tribunal's order was upheld.
Section 149 of the Customs Act governs amendment of shipping bills, and where the statute does not prescribe a limitation period, a departmental circular cannot impose a three-month bar to curtail that right. The Tribunal was therefore justified in rejecting the delay objection and permitting amendment. The Court also held that the mistaken entry of export scheme code was a clerical error, since DFIA applications, file numbers and shipping bills already reflected DFIA exports. On that record, the request was only to correct an inadvertent code error, not to effect a barred conversion of scheme, and the first proviso to Section 149 did not apply. The Tribunal's order was upheld.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.