Educational approval requires mandatory State registration, but incidental surplus and trustee-owned land do not prove private benefit or profit motiv...
Judicial review of settlement orders cannot reopen settled customs notices, while statutory interest remains subject to verification and quantificatio...
Customs Broker licence lending for consideration justified revocation where exporter authorisation and client verification obligations were also breac...
Fraudulent import documents suspend limitation protection, while redemption of confiscated goods requires duty and interest despite bona fide purchase...
ODR arbitration participation remains mandatory after failed conciliation, while jurisdictional and maintainability objections stay available before t...
Transparency in technical bid evaluation requires disclosed standards and recorded reasons; opaque scoring invalidated tender awards and required fres...
Automated export obligation extensions remove separate regional applications after committee approval for Advance Authorisation and EPCG authorisation...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
61 to 80 of 96176 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Penalty against a customs broker failed where the import dispute was treated as an interpretational classification issue and the importer had already been exonerated for absence of mala fide intent. On those facts, a broker who merely filed Bills of Entry on the importer's instructions could not be said to have abetted evasion, and the ingredients for penalty based on false declaration were not made out. The Tribunal also held that the objection on invocation of the larger period would apply equally to the appellants. The penalties under Sections 112(a) and 114AA were deleted and the appeals were allowed.
Penalty against a customs broker failed where the import dispute was treated as an interpretational classification issue and the importer had already been exonerated for absence of mala fide intent. On those facts, a broker who merely filed Bills of Entry on the importer's instructions could not be said to have abetted evasion, and the ingredients for penalty based on false declaration were not made out. The Tribunal also held that the objection on invocation of the larger period would apply equally to the appellants. The penalties under Sections 112(a) and 114AA were deleted and the appeals were allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4809 
Join Channel 
