Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
Physical and mechanical beneficiation that removes foreign matter and concentrates mineral content was treated as manufacture under Chapter Note 4 to Chapter 26, and the goods were classifiable as concentrates. Despite failure to follow CT-3 and related procedure, duty-free clearances to 100% EOUs could not be denied because the lapse arose from a bona fide belief that the goods were not dutiable, and the law did not require an impossible act. The department also failed to prove that the disputed clearances were not as such supplies, so those sales were excluded from turnover. The extended limitation period was rejected because suppression, clandestine removal, and intent to evade duty were not established in an interpretational dispute, and the demand, interest and penalty were set aside.
Physical and mechanical beneficiation that removes foreign matter and concentrates mineral content was treated as manufacture under Chapter Note 4 to Chapter 26, and the goods were classifiable as concentrates. Despite failure to follow CT-3 and related procedure, duty-free clearances to 100% EOUs could not be denied because the lapse arose from a bona fide belief that the goods were not dutiable, and the law did not require an impossible act. The department also failed to prove that the disputed clearances were not as such supplies, so those sales were excluded from turnover. The extended limitation period was rejected because suppression, clandestine removal, and intent to evade duty were not established in an interpretational dispute, and the demand, interest and penalty were set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4811 
Join Channel 
