Proportionate interest, unexplained credits and partner remuneration disputed; proofs of fund nexus and lender identity were decisive and disallowance...
Capital gains valuation from stamp assessment versus net consideration for residential reinvestment: deemed stamp value replaced for gains but not for...
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 
