The authority held that webcams and video conferencing devices facilitate transmission and reception of voice and images, making them classifiable under CTH 8517 rather than as accessories of computers.
The authority ruled that a cable drum tracking device must be classified under tariff heading 8526 because its principal function is GPS-based location tracking, with communication and sensors treated as ancillary features.
The Authority declined to rule on a revised pricing formula for imports from a related entity and directed that the matter be examined by the Special Valuation Branch.
ITAT held that the appellate authority wrongly dismissed the appeal under Section 249(4)(b) as there was no advance tax liability under Section 209. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication on merits.
The Madras High Court granted liberty to file an appeal within 30 days and directed the appellate authority to decide the matter on merits without considering limitation.
The Court ruled that the petitioner must approach the appellate authority under the GST law, while granting conditional liberty to file the appeal despite limitation.
The Supreme Court cancelled bail granted by the High Court after finding that the accused’s criminal history, use of forged identities, and prior conduct were not considered while applying the parity principle.
The Supreme Court overturned a High Court bail order after finding that the seriousness of alleged corporate fraud and statutory bail conditions under the Companies Act were not properly considered.
The Court held that the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 applies to maintenance claims against children or relatives, not disputes over property obstruction by neighbours.
CESTAT held that regular filing of returns and disclosure during audits negates allegations of suppression of facts. The demand based on extended limitation was therefore unsustainable.
