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...
Benami proceedings involving a fictitious-name transaction turn on cumulative evidence rather than the supplier's failure to file tax returns alone. The alleged supplier's absence from its stated address, unserved notices, inconsistent GST business description, untraceable bank account, and lack of credible proof of supply, delivery, payment, or accounting were identified as sufficient to discharge the initial burden; the appellants did not rebut it. The transaction was therefore treated as benami under Section 2(9)(B). In a fictitious transaction, the routed amount may be regarded as returning to the beneficial owner, permitting attachment in that owner's account rather than requiring attachment only from a benamidar. The provisional attachment and related findings were upheld.
Benami proceedings involving a fictitious-name transaction turn on cumulative evidence rather than the supplier's failure to file tax returns alone. The alleged supplier's absence from its stated address, unserved notices, inconsistent GST business description, untraceable bank account, and lack of credible proof of supply, delivery, payment, or accounting were identified as sufficient to discharge the initial burden; the appellants did not rebut it. The transaction was therefore treated as benami under Section 2(9)(B). In a fictitious transaction, the routed amount may be regarded as returning to the beneficial owner, permitting attachment in that owner's account rather than requiring attachment only from a benamidar. The provisional attachment and related findings were upheld.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
