Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Page of 4813
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3301 to 3320 of 96257 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Levy of penalty u/s 112 of CA - Smuggling - Gold - The case of Revenue against these appellants have made out on the basis of their statements recorded at the time of investigation or the statement of the co-accused. All such statements were retracted soon thereafter. Further, these statements have also not stood the test of cross-examination during the adjudication proceedings - Levy of penalty against two persons set aside - Against one person, levy of penalty reduced from Rs. 1 lakh. to Rs. 25,000/-. - AT
Levy of penalty u/s 112 of CA - Smuggling - Gold - The case of Revenue against these appellants have made out on the basis of their statements recorded at the time of investigation or the statement of the co-accused. All such statements were retracted soon thereafter. Further, these statements have also not stood the test of cross-examination during the adjudication proceedings - Levy of penalty against two persons set aside - Against one person, levy of penalty reduced from Rs. 1 lakh. to Rs. 25,000/-. - AT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4813 
Join Channel 
