Defined public benefit can retain charitable character; registration renewal requires examining genuine activities and legal compliance, not surplus a...
Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
Transfer pricing and tax deductions upheld on established principles, while employee contributions and warranty provisions returned for fresh examinat...
Captive transfer pricing relies on industrial consumer tariffs, while genuine quotations can benchmark effluent treatment transfers under the Other Me...
Specific tariff classification for ophthalmic instruments and extended limitation principles determine the treatment of duty demands, confiscation, an...
Integrated golf function determines classification, placing launch monitors and simulators under other golf equipment rather than measuring instrument...
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.