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...
Limitation for penalties arising from alleged cash receipts contrary to section 269ST remains subject to differing views on when the limitation period under section 275(1)(c) begins. Under either approach, penalty proceedings under section 271DA were time-barred because the assessment orders were passed in March 2024, the six-month period ended on 30 September 2024, and the show-cause notice was issued later. The penalty orders and consequential demand notices were therefore unsustainable, and the appeals were dismissed.
Limitation for penalties arising from alleged cash receipts contrary to section 269ST remains subject to differing views on when the limitation period under section 275(1)(c) begins. Under either approach, penalty proceedings under section 271DA were time-barred because the assessment orders were passed in March 2024, the six-month period ended on 30 September 2024, and the show-cause notice was issued later. The penalty orders and consequential demand notices were therefore unsustainable, and the appeals were dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.