Customs valuation must use comparable contemporary imports, while confiscation fines and penalties require proportionate recalculation on reassessed v...
Depositor-protection proceedings prevail over corporate insolvency, while liquidators may recover chit receivables using copies of seized company reco...
Intermediary service classification fails where overseas admission facilitation is supplied independently, preserving export treatment and small-provi...
Satellite transponder bandwidth is telecommunication, not Business Support Service; foreign non-telegraph providers triggered no service tax liability...
Commitment proceedings gain extended timelines, structured defect refiling, and automatic resumption of inquiry after the adjusted completion period e...
Centralised assessment transfer becomes unwarranted once the searched person's assessment is complete, requiring restoration to the appropriate charge...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
321 to 340 of 96333 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Reusable metal containers owned by an overseas supplier and imported with raw material were not treated as separately dutiable goods under the Customs Act, 1962; applying the Supreme Court principle in Chairman, Board of Trustees, Cochin Port Trust v. Arebee Star Maritime Agencies, the Tribunal held that duty could not be demanded again on the containers. Under section 14 read with Rule 10(1) of the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007, only packing cost actually incurred or payable by the importer could be included, and the rental value of the packing material was already reflected in the CIF value of the imported synthetic rubber. The reassessment, including interest and penalties, was set aside.
Reusable metal containers owned by an overseas supplier and imported with raw material were not treated as separately dutiable goods under the Customs Act, 1962; applying the Supreme Court principle in Chairman, Board of Trustees, Cochin Port Trust v. Arebee Star Maritime Agencies, the Tribunal held that duty could not be demanded again on the containers. Under section 14 read with Rule 10(1) of the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007, only packing cost actually incurred or payable by the importer could be included, and the rental value of the packing material was already reflected in the CIF value of the imported synthetic rubber. The reassessment, including interest and penalties, was set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
