Madras
HC directs continuance of status quo and bars precipitative
action by Central Govt. pursuant to preliminary findings by Director
General (DG) Safeguards recommending a provisional safeguard duty at 70% ad
valorem on import of “Solar Cells"; Notes assessee’s challenge to the
preliminary findings on premise that they are in violation of principles of
natural justice, being made before expiry of 30 days as provided in initiation
notification; As per assessee, it is entitled to be heard in the matter and
therefore, notification issued without doing is illegal, arbitrary, without
authority of law and in contravention of Customs Tariff Act, 1975 r/w Rule 6 of
Custom Tariff (Identification and Assessment of Safeguard duty) Rules, 1997;
Further notes assessee’s challenge to recommendation of DG Safeguard for
exemption of safeguard duty on clearance made from SEZ to DTA, contending that
DG Safeguards does not have the power to recommend exemption in terms of 8B(2)
of Customs Tariff Act: HC issues notice to Revenue while posting the matter for
hearing on February 2, 2018 : Madras HC
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
India-Mauritius DTAA Protocol Notified: Key Tax Implications
The Government of India has notified the amendment to the Protocol of the India-Mauritius Double Tax Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) on 13 Oct...
-
A new website launched for TDS related matters www.tdscpc.gov.in TRACES – T DS R econciliation A nalysis and C orrection E nabling S yste...
-
In a recent informal guidance letter, SEBI clarified whether a cousin of a Promoter Group member qualifies as a person ‘related to promote...
-
Slump sale is transfer of one or more business undertakings for a lump sum consideration, without assigning individual values to the each...
-
Key features of File Validation Utility (FVU) version 3.3 FVU 3.3 will be applicable for quarterly TDS/ TCS statements pertaining to...
-
CIT vs. The Instalment Supply Ltd (Delhi High Court) The assessee bought 1614 items of computer systems for Rs.40 lacs from HCL Hewlett ...
-
Facts The applicant („A‟) is a closely held Public Limited company incorporated in India in the year 1953. A‟s shareholder included A (...
-
01. TDS u/s 194J is required to be done for Royalty also w.e.f 13-7-2006. 02. Royalty had been defined under explanation 2 of se...
-
Until now, 'Samaritans' is not how the Independent Directors are purported by Clause 49 in the Listing agreement. An Independ...
-
1. Concept of “limited liability partnership” LLP is an alternative corporate business form that gives the benefits of limited liability ...
-
SREI Infrastructure Finance Ltd vs. ITSC (Delhi High Court) The assessee entered into a scheme of arrangement u/s 391-394 of the Compani...
No comments:
Post a Comment