Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Reassessment jurisdiction fails where unverified portal information is aggregated without examining the taxpayer's explanation or relevance of entries...
Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
Delay in filing customs appeals beyond the statutory period of 60 days, plus the further condonable 30 days, cannot be condoned by the Commissioner (Appeals). The Tribunal found the explanation for delay factually inadequate because the affidavits lacked specific particulars and dates, and the appellants had not consistently claimed that both partners were outside India. Relying on Singh Enterprises, it held that section 5 of the Limitation Act is excluded where the statute fixes the maximum condonable period. The appeals were therefore upheld as time-barred, and the Commissioner (Appeals) had no jurisdiction to entertain them.
Delay in filing customs appeals beyond the statutory period of 60 days, plus the further condonable 30 days, cannot be condoned by the Commissioner (Appeals). The Tribunal found the explanation for delay factually inadequate because the affidavits lacked specific particulars and dates, and the appellants had not consistently claimed that both partners were outside India. Relying on Singh Enterprises, it held that section 5 of the Limitation Act is excluded where the statute fixes the maximum condonable period. The appeals were therefore upheld as time-barred, and the Commissioner (Appeals) had no jurisdiction to entertain them.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.