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 bona fide transferee of a duty-free licence re-registered in the customs system was held not liable for customs duty merely because the licence was later alleged to have been fraudulently re-registered. The Tribunal distinguished an existing licence that had been re-registered from a fake or forged licence, and applied the principle that a purchaser for value cannot be denied benefit where the licence was validly in circulation and acted upon during its validity. It also held that the extended period was unavailable because the notice relied only on an alleged failure to verify the licence, without any misrepresentation, collusion, or suppression by the purchaser. The demand and impugned order were set aside.
A bona fide transferee of a duty-free licence re-registered in the customs system was held not liable for customs duty merely because the licence was later alleged to have been fraudulently re-registered. The Tribunal distinguished an existing licence that had been re-registered from a fake or forged licence, and applied the principle that a purchaser for value cannot be denied benefit where the licence was validly in circulation and acted upon during its validity. It also held that the extended period was unavailable because the notice relied only on an alleged failure to verify the licence, without any misrepresentation, collusion, or suppression by the purchaser. The demand and impugned order were set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.