Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
CESTAT set aside penalties for abetment of improper export and for use of false or incorrect material because the record did not show a specific, corroborated role by the appellant in overvaluation, misclassification, or the drawback claim. The evidence only linked him to helping obtain a fake driving licence and facilitate a bank account for the alleged mastermind, which was insufficient for penalty under Section 114(iii) and outside the scope of Section 114AA, as he was not shown to have filed, made, signed, or used any false customs document. The Tribunal also held that Section 117 could not be invoked without a show cause notice proposing that penalty.
CESTAT set aside penalties for abetment of improper export and for use of false or incorrect material because the record did not show a specific, corroborated role by the appellant in overvaluation, misclassification, or the drawback claim. The evidence only linked him to helping obtain a fake driving licence and facilitate a bank account for the alleged mastermind, which was insufficient for penalty under Section 114(iii) and outside the scope of Section 114AA, as he was not shown to have filed, made, signed, or used any false customs document. The Tribunal also held that Section 117 could not be invoked without a show cause notice proposing that penalty.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.