Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
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.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
