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...
Bluetooth wireless headsets, headphones, earphones, earbuds and neck bands were held classifiable under CTI 8518 30 00, following the Tribunal's earlier decision on identical goods, and the claimed exemption was denied. The demand for the normal period was sustained on that classification. The extended period of limitation could not be invoked in this classification dispute, and the penalty under section 114A, being dependent on the same basis, was set aside. The matter was remitted only for segregation of the demand within the normal period and computation of interest on the confirmed demand.
Bluetooth wireless headsets, headphones, earphones, earbuds and neck bands were held classifiable under CTI 8518 30 00, following the Tribunal's earlier decision on identical goods, and the claimed exemption was denied. The demand for the normal period was sustained on that classification. The extended period of limitation could not be invoked in this classification dispute, and the penalty under section 114A, being dependent on the same basis, was set aside. The matter was remitted only for segregation of the demand within the normal period and computation of interest on the confirmed demand.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.