Opportunity to respond to jurisdictional reports is mandatory before customs settlement duty enhancement; connected applications require consistent ad...
Specific customs headings for scaffolding components prevail over general classification, invalidating misclassification proceedings and enabling with...
Liquidator appointment under Section 34 requires consideration of creditor recommendations, valid professional authorisation, and preservation of vali...
Income-tax exemption for specified regulatory fees and government grants applies subject to non-commercial activity and continuing compliance conditio...
Digital accessibility audit and remediation deadlines extended, while all other disability-compliance obligations for regulated entities remain unchan...
Page of 4811
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
781 to 800 of 96207 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
ONT/ONU home gateway units and OLTs were treated as machines for reception and transmission of data under CTI 8517 62 90, not as residual goods under CTI 8517 69 50 or 8517 69 90, because their undisputed function was to receive broadband signals through optical fibre and transmit them to subscriber devices. Exemption denial under Notification No. 24/2005-Cus and Notification No. 57/2017-Cus was remanded for fresh consideration after taking the telecom expert report into account, since the technical characterisation of the goods had not been properly examined. The extended period of limitation was not available because collusion, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts was not established, and penalties under sections 114A and 114AA were set aside.
ONT/ONU home gateway units and OLTs were treated as machines for reception and transmission of data under CTI 8517 62 90, not as residual goods under CTI 8517 69 50 or 8517 69 90, because their undisputed function was to receive broadband signals through optical fibre and transmit them to subscriber devices. Exemption denial under Notification No. 24/2005-Cus and Notification No. 57/2017-Cus was remanded for fresh consideration after taking the telecom expert report into account, since the technical characterisation of the goods had not been properly examined. The extended period of limitation was not available because collusion, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts was not established, and penalties under sections 114A and 114AA were set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4811 
Join Channel 
