Invoice-based recovery claims remain time-barred despite separate winding-up proceedings, absent valid acknowledgment or part-payment of the disputed ...
Extended limitation fails without specific suppression allegations, while overseas employee secondment remains taxable as manpower supply within norma...
Time-share accommodation classification excludes Club or Association Service where purchasers receive contractual occupancy rights without genuine mem...
CENVAT credit for trading requires reversal, while taxable-service rental credit remains proportionately available and limitation issues await resolut...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
561 to 580 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" ?
For second-hand machinery, customs valuation must follow the statutory sequence under the Valuation Rules and cannot rest on internet offers, broad market estimates, or unsupported tonnage methods. Where imported cranes were examined, assessed on chartered engineer certification, and no reliable evidence of a higher transaction value or legally admissible corroboration existed, the later redetermination of assessable value and differential duty failed. A time-bar also applied to consignments beyond five years under Section 28, so duty could not survive on those imports. Mere mismatch between declared invoice value and later revalued figures did not prove misdeclaration for confiscation or penalty under Section 111(m); redemption fine and penalties were set aside. The same unsustainable valuation basis could not support finalisation of provisional assessment under Section 18.
For second-hand machinery, customs valuation must follow the statutory sequence under the Valuation Rules and cannot rest on internet offers, broad market estimates, or unsupported tonnage methods. Where imported cranes were examined, assessed on chartered engineer certification, and no reliable evidence of a higher transaction value or legally admissible corroboration existed, the later redetermination of assessable value and differential duty failed. A time-bar also applied to consignments beyond five years under Section 28, so duty could not survive on those imports. Mere mismatch between declared invoice value and later revalued figures did not prove misdeclaration for confiscation or penalty under Section 111(m); redemption fine and penalties were set aside. The same unsustainable valuation basis could not support finalisation of provisional assessment under Section 18.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
