Export valuation requires contemporaneous evidence; unrelated invoices cannot prove overvaluation, and dual penalties on firm and partner are impermis...
Ratification of resignation acceptance validates separation retrospectively, while withdrawal may be refused through reasoned administrative discretio...
Nature-dependent electricity contracts receive new Ind AS accounting, hedge designation, transition and financial-statement disclosure requirements fr...
Alternative GST remedy permitted protective writ intervention for ex parte adjudication, preserving independent appellate review of input tax credit d...
A vehicle manufactured in April 2008, registered in the United Kingdom before import, was treated as a new car because the foreign registration was only a technical requirement for movement from the showroom to the port. Applying CBEC Circular No. 1/2005-Customs and the ruling in Rahul Bhandare, CESTAT held that the concessional benefit under Notification No. 21/2002-Cus. was rightly extended. Once the import was accepted as that of a new car, confiscation-related proceedings against the vehicle could not survive, and the redemption fine under section 125 was deleted.
A vehicle manufactured in April 2008, registered in the United Kingdom before import, was treated as a new car because the foreign registration was only a technical requirement for movement from the showroom to the port. Applying CBEC Circular No. 1/2005-Customs and the ruling in Rahul Bhandare, CESTAT held that the concessional benefit under Notification No. 21/2002-Cus. was rightly extended. Once the import was accepted as that of a new car, confiscation-related proceedings against the vehicle could not survive, and the redemption fine under section 125 was deleted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
