Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
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 4817 
Join Channel 
