Country of Origin Certificates and declared transaction value supported preferential customs exemption where authenticity and invoice prices remained ...
Online bond platforms may offer overseas-regulated products and tax-specific bonds subject to disclosures, compliance safeguards and revised complianc...
Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
Page of 4814
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
381 to 400 of 96262 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
A customs broker penalty dispute turned on whether a medicine exported as MIGRAN, containing Ergotamine, fell within Schedule-B and required a Narcotic Commissioner NOC. The Tribunal held that Schedule-B covered only Ergotamine and its salts, not preparations containing it, so the NOC-based penalty could not stand. It also found that knowledge of undeclared additional medicine could not fairly be attributed to the broker on the facts, given the exporter's stated ignorance and the technical uncertainty surrounding the product. In any event, it held that the residuary penalty under Section 117 was unavailable where the CBLR contained a specific penalty provision, and it set aside the penalty order.
A customs broker penalty dispute turned on whether a medicine exported as MIGRAN, containing Ergotamine, fell within Schedule-B and required a Narcotic Commissioner NOC. The Tribunal held that Schedule-B covered only Ergotamine and its salts, not preparations containing it, so the NOC-based penalty could not stand. It also found that knowledge of undeclared additional medicine could not fairly be attributed to the broker on the facts, given the exporter's stated ignorance and the technical uncertainty surrounding the product. In any event, it held that the residuary penalty under Section 117 was unavailable where the CBLR contained a specific penalty provision, and it set aside the penalty order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.