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...
Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
221 to 240 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 was held not liable for export overvaluation where the record showed the exporter's authority letter, IEC, PAN-based KYC material and related documents, and the alleged failures to advise compliance, exercise due diligence and verify the client were not proved. The Tribunal reiterated that a broker is not required to determine export value or detect misdeclaration as a customs officer would, and rejected liability based on supposed collusion. It also treated the inquiry and adjudication timelines under the Customs Broker Licensing Regulations as mandatory, so delay beyond those periods vitiated the proceedings. Separate penalty already imposed on the same facts made the further penal action unsustainable, and the licence revocation, forfeiture and penalty were set aside.
A Customs Broker was held not liable for export overvaluation where the record showed the exporter's authority letter, IEC, PAN-based KYC material and related documents, and the alleged failures to advise compliance, exercise due diligence and verify the client were not proved. The Tribunal reiterated that a broker is not required to determine export value or detect misdeclaration as a customs officer would, and rejected liability based on supposed collusion. It also treated the inquiry and adjudication timelines under the Customs Broker Licensing Regulations as mandatory, so delay beyond those periods vitiated the proceedings. Separate penalty already imposed on the same facts made the further penal action unsustainable, and the licence revocation, forfeiture and penalty were set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
