Opportunity to respond to jurisdictional reports is mandatory before customs settlement duty enhancement; connected applications require consistent ad...
Specific customs headings for scaffolding components prevail over general classification, invalidating misclassification proceedings and enabling with...
Liquidator appointment under Section 34 requires consideration of creditor recommendations, valid professional authorisation, and preservation of vali...
GST could not be levied again on a shipping line's ocean freight services for CIF imports where the freight component had already suffered customs duty in the import transaction, because the transportation service formed part of a composite supply. The Court held that taxing the same service element separately in the hands of the petitioner would amount to double taxation and would be inconsistent with the GST scheme. Relying on Union of India v. Mohit Minerals Pvt. Ltd., it found that transportation and insurance in a CIF contract are naturally bundled with the supply of goods. The show-cause notice and adjudication order were quashed, and refund with interest was directed.
GST could not be levied again on a shipping line's ocean freight services for CIF imports where the freight component had already suffered customs duty in the import transaction, because the transportation service formed part of a composite supply. The Court held that taxing the same service element separately in the hands of the petitioner would amount to double taxation and would be inconsistent with the GST scheme. Relying on Union of India v. Mohit Minerals Pvt. Ltd., it found that transportation and insurance in a CIF contract are naturally bundled with the supply of goods. The show-cause notice and adjudication order were quashed, and refund with interest was directed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.