Commercial vehicle depreciation, scientifically determined warranty provisions and exempt-income disallowances were resolved in favour of the taxpayer...
Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Page of 4819
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
781 to 800 of 96365 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
For IGST classification, the tariff heading used in the rate notification was treated as inseparably linked to the goods description, so the Department could not shift the goods to a residual entry without first challenging the importer's self-assessed classification under heading 8432. As the show cause notice did not seek reclassification or dispute that classification, a higher IGST demand under the residual serial could not be sustained and the appellate remand for fresh adjudication was unwarranted. The Tribunal also held that the extended limitation period was unavailable because the notice did not establish wilful misstatement, collusion or suppression of facts. The remand was set aside and the order dropping the demand was restored.
For IGST classification, the tariff heading used in the rate notification was treated as inseparably linked to the goods description, so the Department could not shift the goods to a residual entry without first challenging the importer's self-assessed classification under heading 8432. As the show cause notice did not seek reclassification or dispute that classification, a higher IGST demand under the residual serial could not be sustained and the appellate remand for fresh adjudication was unwarranted. The Tribunal also held that the extended limitation period was unavailable because the notice did not establish wilful misstatement, collusion or suppression of facts. The remand was set aside and the order dropping the demand was restored.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
