Regulatory consolidation for investment advisers: SEBI issues master circular consolidating guidance and prescribing compliance, reporting, fees and s...
Reopening of assessment cannot rest solely on an audit party's opinion; reassessment under Section 147/148 is impermissible and power of revision shou...
Tested party selection: functional analysis identified the least complex unit as the appropriate tested party, altering the transfer pricing adjustmen...
CESTAT treated the threshold question as one of jurisdiction: whether customs authorities and the Tribunal can determine disputes involving interpretation of IGST rate schedules on imports, given the separate appellate framework under the GST enactments. Noting conflicting views on the issue and examining the Customs Act, Customs Tariff Act and IGST Act scheme, the Tribunal held that the jurisdictional conflict required authoritative resolution before any merits review. It therefore referred the formulated questions to the President for constitution of a Larger Bench and left the classification and rate dispute open.
CESTAT treated the threshold question as one of jurisdiction: whether customs authorities and the Tribunal can determine disputes involving interpretation of IGST rate schedules on imports, given the separate appellate framework under the GST enactments. Noting conflicting views on the issue and examining the Customs Act, Customs Tariff Act and IGST Act scheme, the Tribunal held that the jurisdictional conflict required authoritative resolution before any merits review. It therefore referred the formulated questions to the President for constitution of a Larger Bench and left the classification and rate dispute open.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.