Transfer pricing margin adjustments require matching treatment of non-operating income and related costs, with comparability issues reconsidered on ev...
Preliminary-expense amortisation and MAT exempt-income adjustments prevailed, while trademark costs and managerial remuneration require fresh verifica...
Export valuation requires contemporaneous evidence; unrelated invoices cannot prove overvaluation, and dual penalties on firm and partner are impermis...
Ratification of resignation acceptance validates separation retrospectively, while withdrawal may be refused through reasoned administrative discretio...
Nature-dependent electricity contracts receive new Ind AS accounting, hedge designation, transition and financial-statement disclosure requirements fr...
Alternative GST remedy permitted protective writ intervention for ex parte adjudication, preserving independent appellate review of input tax credit d...
Page of 4826
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
661 to 680 of 96508 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Self-assessed Bills of Entry attain finality unless challenged within the statutory appellate period. The Tribunal held that reassessment under Section 17(5) applies only where departmental verification, examination, testing or similar scrutiny shows the self-assessment to be incorrect; a later allegation of short shipment, raised about two years after clearance, could not reopen a concluded assessment. It further held that refund proceedings cannot be used as a substitute for appeal or as a fresh assessment on merits. Because the importer did not timely challenge the assessment, and any belated challenge was beyond the condonable period, both reassessment and refund were rightly rejected.
Self-assessed Bills of Entry attain finality unless challenged within the statutory appellate period. The Tribunal held that reassessment under Section 17(5) applies only where departmental verification, examination, testing or similar scrutiny shows the self-assessment to be incorrect; a later allegation of short shipment, raised about two years after clearance, could not reopen a concluded assessment. It further held that refund proceedings cannot be used as a substitute for appeal or as a fresh assessment on merits. Because the importer did not timely challenge the assessment, and any belated challenge was beyond the condonable period, both reassessment and refund were rightly rejected.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.