Bona fide disclosure requirements govern under-reporting penalties, and post-penalty immunity applications cannot secure available statutory protectio...
Certificate-of-origin verification procedure governs preferential customs benefits; denial without retroactive verification was set aside with consequ...
Disciplinary Committee jurisdiction and mandatory investigation requirements invalidated cancellation of an insolvency professional's registration and...
Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1221 to 1240 of 96092 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's failure to verify the authenticity of duty credit scrips was treated as conscious facilitation where forged, duplicated and re-registered DGFT scrips were used for duty debit. The Tribunal held that the broker was bound to insist on physical copies or verify the scrip particulars from the DGFT database, since the clearance condition required production of the scrip before the proper officer for debit. On the facts, the repeated use of forged scrips and complete lack of verification justified liability under section 114AA, and the penalty was upheld. The Tribunal distinguished an earlier CESTAT ruling because intent and knowledge had been specifically addressed here.
A customs broker's failure to verify the authenticity of duty credit scrips was treated as conscious facilitation where forged, duplicated and re-registered DGFT scrips were used for duty debit. The Tribunal held that the broker was bound to insist on physical copies or verify the scrip particulars from the DGFT database, since the clearance condition required production of the scrip before the proper officer for debit. On the facts, the repeated use of forged scrips and complete lack of verification justified liability under section 114AA, and the penalty was upheld. The Tribunal distinguished an earlier CESTAT ruling because intent and knowledge had been specifically addressed here.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
