Judicial review of settlement orders cannot reopen settled customs notices, while statutory interest remains subject to verification and quantificatio...
Customs Broker licence lending for consideration justified revocation where exporter authorisation and client verification obligations were also breac...
Fraudulent import documents suspend limitation protection, while redemption of confiscated goods requires duty and interest despite bona fide purchase...
ODR arbitration participation remains mandatory after failed conciliation, while jurisdictional and maintainability objections stay available before t...
Transparency in technical bid evaluation requires disclosed standards and recorded reasons; opaque scoring invalidated tender awards and required fres...
Automated export obligation extensions remove separate regional applications after committee approval for Advance Authorisation and EPCG authorisation...
International cargo transhipment through Indian ports continues with Customs-controlled storage, re-export safeguards, and coordinated multi-station m...
Medical reimbursement paid by a company to its salaried full-time employee and promoter-director for critical heart surgery was held deductible as business expenditure under section 37(1). The Tribunal found the payment commercially expedient because the employee was the driving force behind the business, the surgery was genuine and undertaken at a recognised hospital, and the company bore only part of the total cost while the balance was personally met. It also held that the timing of the Board resolution, the marginal excess over the sanctioned amount, and the argument of personal expenditure did not justify disallowance. The reimbursement, authorised and debited as employee benefit expense, was therefore allowable and the disallowance was deleted.
Medical reimbursement paid by a company to its salaried full-time employee and promoter-director for critical heart surgery was held deductible as business expenditure under section 37(1). The Tribunal found the payment commercially expedient because the employee was the driving force behind the business, the surgery was genuine and undertaken at a recognised hospital, and the company bore only part of the total cost while the balance was personally met. It also held that the timing of the Board resolution, the marginal excess over the sanctioned amount, and the argument of personal expenditure did not justify disallowance. The reimbursement, authorised and debited as employee benefit expense, was therefore allowable and the disallowance was deleted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.