Religious purpose exclusion versus charitable purpose: non overriding religious objects do not attract Explanation 3, registration directed under sect...
Search-assessment proviso jurisdiction, time-barred valuation reports, and denial of cross-examination vitiate valuation-based and confession-based ad...
Proceeds of crime: provisional attachment confirmed; equivalent value attachment and acquisition date fair market value upheld, Covid exclusion preser...
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.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
