Employee stock-shortage penalties do not constitute consideration for services, preventing GST collection under Schedule II in employment relationship...
Transfer-pricing treatment of ITeS margins excludes pass-through tax recoveries and separate delayed-receivables interest after working-capital adjust...
Capacity-utilisation adjustments under TNMM can neutralise substantiated COVID-related idle costs where underutilisation materially affects profitabil...
Page of 4830
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
181 to 200 of 96587 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Proceedings to enforce a post-import exemption condition under Notification No. 64/88 were barred by limitation even though the obligation was continuing in nature. The HC held that section 159A of the Customs Act could not extend the time limit beyond the period prescribed under section 28; after rescission of the notification on 01.03.1994, the outer five-year period expired on 28.02.1999. As the show cause notice was issued only on 27.12.1999, the confiscation action was time-barred. Because the confiscation proceedings failed on limitation, the consequential penalty also could not survive.
Proceedings to enforce a post-import exemption condition under Notification No. 64/88 were barred by limitation even though the obligation was continuing in nature. The HC held that section 159A of the Customs Act could not extend the time limit beyond the period prescribed under section 28; after rescission of the notification on 01.03.1994, the outer five-year period expired on 28.02.1999. As the show cause notice was issued only on 27.12.1999, the confiscation action was time-barred. Because the confiscation proceedings failed on limitation, the consequential penalty also could not survive.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.