Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
A mistaken reference to the wrong tax penalty provision does not, by itself, invalidate proceedings; however, where the order imposes a penalty rate consistent with the wrong provision, the error is substantive rather than clerical. The discrepancy between a 100% penalty under one provision and a 50% penalty under the applicable provision showed that the power had been exercised on the wrong footing, making the order unsustainable. Fresh proceedings may be initiated under the correct provision in accordance with law.
A mistaken reference to the wrong tax penalty provision does not, by itself, invalidate proceedings; however, where the order imposes a penalty rate consistent with the wrong provision, the error is substantive rather than clerical. The discrepancy between a 100% penalty under one provision and a 50% penalty under the applicable provision showed that the power had been exercised on the wrong footing, making the order unsustainable. Fresh proceedings may be initiated under the correct provision in accordance with law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.