Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Highlights - Adv. Search
    Assessment under Section 143(3) valid without DVO report; fresh hearing ordered with natural justice ensured
    Order under Section 74 GST quashed for lack of personal hearing, violating Section 75(4) and natural justice principles
    Failure to Respond to Section 245 IT Act Notice Allows Refund Set-Off; AO Must Verify Excess Adjustment and Provide Hearing
    Deemed Dividend Applies When Company Advances Are Not Used for Business Under Section 2(22)(e)
    TPO's DRP Orders Are Internal Acts; AO's Assessment Quashed for Section 144C(13) Non-Compliance and ALP Errors
    Transfer Pricing: Excluding Non-Comparable Entities Under Section 92C for Accurate ALP Determination
    DRI Officials Confirmed as Proper Officers Under Section 28 Customs Act; Pre-SCN Consultation Not Mandatory
    Summons Quashed Against Nominal Director Lacking Concrete Involvement Under Section 138 NI Act
    Non-resident's Salary for Services Outside India Exempt Under India-Malaysia DTAA Section
    ITAT Recalls Order on Transfer Pricing Adjustment Under Section 92BA, Allows Fresh Appeal Hearing
    Injunction Against Director Removal Meetings Quashed Under Section 9 Arbitration Act, Upholding Urgent Notice Rules
    Appeals under Section 61 IBC not allowed against administrative transfer orders under Rule 16(d); Appeals lie under Section 421 Companies Act
    August 14, 2025 Case Laws Money Laundering
    Attachment of Equivalent Property Upheld Under Money Laundering Laws When Criminal Proceeds Are Missing
    Cancellation of GST Registration under Section 29(2)(c) Requires Following Rule 22 Procedures and Natural Justice
    Petition dismissed under Article 227; remedy available under Section 107 of GST Act for input tax credit disputes
    Exemption Allowed Under Section 10(23C)(v) Despite Late Audit Report Filing, Non-Compliance Not Fatal
    Appeal dismissed due to delay and failure to comply with Rule 22(2) of NCLAT Rules on certified copy requirement
    EMD and PBG forfeiture upheld; only equity infusion refundable under Insolvency rules
    Writ Petition Dismissed for Rs. 8.83 Crore Fraudulent ITC Claims; Statutory Appeal Required Under GST Rules
    Petition Dismissed Over Fraudulent Input Tax Credit Claim and Delay Objection Under ITC Rules

Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

NOTE:

Highlights

Back

All Highlights

Showing Results for : Law : All
Reset Filters
Showing
Records
ExpandCollapse

    Highlights

    Back

    All Highlights

    Showing Results for : Law : AllReset Filters
    Case ID :

    The case pertains to the valuation of imported porcelain...

    Customs Appeal: Porcelain Tile Valuation Upheld; Lack of Evidence to Reject Declared Value Cited as Key Factor.

    📋
    Contents
    Summary
    Note

    Note

    Note

    Bookmark

    print

    Print

    CustomsSeptember 21, 2024Case LawsAT

    The case pertains to the valuation of imported porcelain vitrified tiles. The key points are: The assessment attained finality, but the appellant has the legal right to challenge the assessment order u/s 128 of the Customs Act, 1962, as per the Supreme Court's judgment in ITC LIMITED VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, KOLKATA -IV. The NIDB (National Import Database) data cannot be the sole basis for rejecting the declared value. Comparing goods imported by different importers is unjustified. The adjudication authority acknowledged that the goods are not branded, and identical goods are unavailable for comparison. The impugned order lacks admissible evidence to reject the transaction value. Details of other imports were not furnished, and there is no mention of the lowest value among contemporaneous imports to ascertain if such imports can reject the declared value. The value enhancement was made without following the Customs Valuation (Determination of Value of Imported Goods) Rules, 2007. Therefore, the declared value must be adopted for assessment. The appeal was allowed.

    Topics

    ActsIncome Tax