Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1201 to 1220 of 96333 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 4817 
Join Channel 
